V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov. Functional and procedural programming in Mathematica

International Academy of Noosphere
the Baltic branch
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
Functional and procedural
programming in Mathematica
KDP Press – 2020
Functional and procedural programming in Mathematica. V. Aladjev,
M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov.– USA: KDP Press, 352 p., 2020.
Software presented in the book contains a number of useful and
effective receptions of the procedural and functional programming in
Mathematica that extend the system software and allow sometimes
much more efficiently and easily to program the software for various
purposes. Among them there are means that are of interest from the
point of view of including of their or their analogs in Mathematica,
at the same time they use approaches, rather useful in programming
of various applications. In addition, it must be kept in mind that the
classification of the presented tools by their appointment in a certain
measure has a rather conditional character because these tools can be
crossed substantially among themselves by the functionality.
The freeware package MathToolBox containing the above means
is attached to the present book. The MathToolBox not only contains a
number of useful procedures and functions, but can serve as a rather
useful collection of programming examples using both standard and
non–standard techniques of functional–procedural programming.
The book is oriented on a wide enough circle of the users from
computer mathematics systems, researchers, teachers and students of
universities for courses of computer science, physics, mathematics,
and a lot of other natural disciplines. The book will be of interest also
to the specialists of industry and technology which use the computer
mathematics systems in own professional activity. At last, the book is
a rather useful handbook with fruitful methods on the procedural
and functional programming in the Mathematica system.
Mathematica 2, 5 ÷ 12.1.0 – trademarks of Wolfram Research Inc.
Printed by KDP Press
May 31, 2020
© <2020> by V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
ISBN 979-8650293118
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
Contents
Introduction
Chapter 1: The user functions in Mathematica
1.1. The user functions, defined intuitively
1.2. The user pure functions
1.3. Some useful tools for work with the user functions
Chapter 2: The user procedures in Mathematica
2.1. Definition of procedures in Mathematica software
2.2. Headings of procedures
2.3. Optional arguments of procedures and functions
2.4. Local variables in Mathematica procedures
2.5. Exit mechanisms of the user procedures
2.6. Tools for testing of procedures and functions
2.7. The nested blocks and modules
Chapter 3: Programming tools of the user procedure body
3.1. Branching control structures in the Mathematica
* Conditional branching structures
* Unconditional transitions
3.2. Cyclic control structures in the Mathematica
3.3. Some special types of cyclic control structures in
the Mathematica system
3.4. Mathematica tools for string expressions
* Replacements and extractions in strings
* Substrings processing in strings
* Expressions containing in strings
3.5. Mathematica tools for lists processing
3.6. Additional tools for the Mathematica
3.7. Attributes of procedures and functions
3.8. Additional tools expanding the built-in
Mathematica functions, or its software as a whole
3.9. Certain additional tools of expressions processing
3
5
7
8
12
20
28
29
38
57
71
86
92
100
105
109
109
113
118
123
128
139
141
153
158
185
216
221
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
in the Mathematica software
* Tools of testing of correctness of expressions
* Expressions processing at level of their components
* Replacement subexpressions in expressions
* Expressions in strings
Chapter 4: Software for input-output in Mathematica
4.1. Tools of Mathematica for work with internal files
4.2. Tools of Mathematica for work with external files
4.3. Tools of Mathematica for attributes processing of
directories and datafiles
4.4. Additional tools for files and directories processing
of file system of the computer
4.5. Special tools for files and directories processing
Chapter 5: Organization of the user software
5.1. MathToolBox package for Mathematica system
5.2. Operating with the user packages in Mathematica
* The concept of context in Mathematica
* Interconnection of contexts and packages
5.3. Additional tools of operating with user packages
References
About the authors
236
237
241
249
261
264
264
269
280
287
297
305
309
318
319
327
338
347
351
This book completes our multi–year cycle of book publications
on general theory of statistics, computer science, cellular automata
(homogeneous structures), Maple and Mathematica along with creation
of software for the latest two computer mathematics systems Maple
and Mathematica [42] and [16] accordingly.
All rights reserved. This book or any portion thereof may not be reproduced or
used in any manner whatsoever without the express written permission of the
publisher except for the use of brief quotations in a book review or a scholarly
journal. This book completes a multi-year cycle of our publications in five areas:
General theory of statistics, Information science, Cellular automata, Maple and
Mathematica along with creation of software for Maple and Mathematica.
For contacts: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
4
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
Introduction
Systems of computer mathematics (SCM) find wide enough
application in a whole number of natural, economic and social
sciences such as: technologies, chemistry, informatics, mathematics,
physics, education, economics, sociology, etc. Systems Mathematica
and Maple, and some others are more and more demanded for
learning of mathematically oriented disciplines, in scientifical
researches and technologies. SCM are main tools for scientists,
teachers, researchers, and engineers. The investigations on the
basis of SCM, as a rule, well combine algebraical methods with
advanced computing methods. In this sense, SCM are a certain
interdisciplinary area between informatics and mathematics in
which researches will be concentrated on the development of
algorithms for algebraic (symbolical) and numerical calculations,
data processing, and development of programming languages
along with software for realization of algorithms of this kind
and problems of different purpose basing on them.
It is possible to note that among modern SCM the leading
positions are undoubtedly taken by the Maple and Matematica
systems, alternately being ahead of each other on this or that
indicator. The given statement is based on our long–term use in
different purposes of both systems – Maple and Mathematica
and also work on preparation and edition of the book series and
some papers in Russian and English in this direction [1-42]. At
the same time, as a result of expanded use of the above systems
were created the package MathToolBox for Mathematica and
library UserLib6789 for Maple [16,42]. All tools from the above
library and package are supplied with freeware license and have
open program code. Programming of many projects in Maple
and Mathematica substantially promoted emergence of a lot of
system tools from the above library and package. So, openness
of MathToolBox package code allows both to modify the tools
containing in it, and to program on their basis own tools, or to
use their components in various appendices. Experience of use
of library and package showed efficiency of such approach.
5
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
In particular, MathToolBox package contains more than
1320 tools of different purpose which eliminate restrictions of a
number of standard tools of Mathematica system, and expand
its software with new tools. In this context, this package can
serve as a certain additional tool of procedural and functional
programming, especially useful in the numerous appendices
where certain nonstandard evaluations have to accompany
programming. At that, tools represented in this package have a
direct relationship to certain principal questions of procedural
and functional programming in Mathematica system, not only
for the decision of applied problems, but, above all, for creation
of software extending frequently used facilities of the system,
eliminating their defects or extending Mathematica with new
facilities. The software presented in the package contains a lot
of rather useful and effective receptions of programming in the
Mathematica, and extends its software that allows to program
the tasks of various purpose more simply and more effectively.
A number of tools of the given package is used in the examples
illustrating these or those provisions of the book.
In the book basic objects of programming in Mathematica –
functions and procedures are considered that consist the base of
functional–procedural programming. The given book considers
some principal questions of procedural–functional programming
in Mathematica, not only for decision of various applied tasks,
but, as well, for creation of software expanding frequently used
facilities of the system and/or eliminating their limitations, or
expanding the system with new facilities. The important role of
functions and procedures take place at creation of effective and
legible user software.
The book is oriented on a wide enough circle of the users of
the CMS, researchers, mathematicians, physicists, teachers and
students of universities for courses of mathematics, computer
science, physics, chemistry, etc. The book will be of interest to
the specialists of industry and technology, economics, medicine
and others too, that use the CMS in own professional activity.
6
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
Chapter 1: The user functions in Mathematica
Function is one of basic concepts of mathematics, being not
less important object in programming systems, not excluding
Mathematica system, with that difference that function – as a
subject to programming – very significantly differs from strictly
mathematical concept of function, considering specific features
of programming in the Mathematica system.
Mathematica has a large number of functions of different
purpose and operations over them. Each function is rather well
documented and supplied with the most typical examples of its
application. Unfortunately, unlike Maple, the program code of
the Mathematica functions is closed that significantly narrows
a possibility of deeper mastering the system and acquaintance
with the receptions used by it and a technique of programming.
Truth, with rare exception, Mathematica allows to make
assignments that override the standard built–in functions and
meaning of Mathematica objects. However, program codes of
the built–in functions of the system remain closed for the user.
Names of built–in functions submit to some general properties,
namely: names consist of complete English words, or standard
mathematical abbreviations. In addition, the first letter of each
name is capitalized. Functions whose names end with Q letter
as a rule usually "ask a question", and return either True or False.
Many important functions of the Mathematica system can
be found in our books [1-15], that provide detailed discussions
of the built-in functions, the features of their implementation
along with our tools [16] which expand or supplement them. A
full arsenal of functionality can be found in the system manual.
Here we will cover the basic issues of organizing user functions
in Mathematica along with some tools that provide a number
of important operations over user-defined functions. Moreover,
it is possible to get acquainted with many of them in package
MathToolBox [16] and in certain our books [1-15]. We pass to
definition of the main functional user objects.
7
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
1.1. The classical functions, defined intuitively. Functions
of this type are determines by expressions as follows:
(a)
(b)
F[x_, y_, z_, …] := ℜ[x, y, z, …]
F[x_ /; TestQ[x], y_, z_ /; TestQ[z], …] := ℜ[x, y, z, …]
Definition allows two formats (a) and (b) from which the
first format is similar to the format of a classical mathematical
function f(x, y, z, ...) = ℜ(x, y, z, ...) from n variables with that
difference that for formal arguments x,y,z,... the object template
are used “_” which can designate any admissible expression of
the system while ℜ(x,y,z,…) designate an arbitrary expression
from variables x,y,z ..., including constants and function calls,
for example:
In[1425]:= F[x_, y_, z_] := a*x*b*y + N[Sin[2019]]
In[1426]:= F[42, 77, 2019]
Out[1426]= 0.864461 + 3234*a*b
Whereas the second format unlike the first allows to hold
testing of actual arguments obtained at function call F[x, y, z]
for validity. It does a testing expression TestQ[x] attributed to
formal argument e.g. x – if at least one testing expression on a
relevant argument returns False, then function call is returned
unevaluated, otherwise the function call returns the required
value, if at evaluation of expression ℜ was no an erroneous or
especial situation, for example:
In[8]:= F[x_ /; IntegerQ[x], y_, z_Symbol] := a*x*b*y + c*z
In[9]:= F[77, 90, G]
Out[9]= 6930*a*b + c*G
In[10]:= F[77, 90, 56]
Out[10]= F[77, 90, 56]
At the same time, for an actual argument its Head, e.g. List,
Integer, String, Symbol, etc, as that illustrates the above example,
can act as a test. At standard approach the concept of a function
does not allow the use of local variables. As a rule Mathematica
system assumes that all variables are global. This means that
every time you use a name e.g. w, the Mathematica normally
assumes that you are referring to the same object. However, at
8
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
program writing, you may not want all variables to be global.
In this case, you need the w in different points of a program to
be treated as a local variable. At the same time, local variables in
function definition can be set using modules. Within module you
can give a list of variables which are to be treated as local. This
goal can be achieved with help of blocks too. A simple example
illustrates the told:
In[47]:= F[x_, y_] := x*y + Module[{a = 5, b = 6}, a*x + b*y]
In[48]:= F[42, 77]
Out[48]= 3906
In[49]:= {a, b} = {0, 0}
Out[49]= {0, 0}
In[50]:= F[42, 77]
Out[50]= 3906
In[51]:= S[x_, y_] := x*Block[{a = 5, b = 6}, a/b*y^2]
In[52]:= S[42, 47]
Out[52]= 77315
In[53]:= {a, b} = {0, 0}; S[42, 47]
Out[53]= 77315
In addition, pattern object "___" or "__" is used for formal
arguments in a function definition can stand for any sequence
of zero or more expressions or for any nonempty sequence of
expressions accordingly, for example:
In[2257]:= G[x__] := Plus[x]
In[2258]:= G[500, 90, 46]
Out[2258]= 636
In[2259]:= G1[x___] := Plus[x]
In[2260]:= {G1[], G1[42, 47, 67]}
Out[2260]= {0, 156}
Lack of such definition of function is that the user cannot
use local variables, for example, the coefficients of polynomials
and other symbols other than calls of standard functions or local
symbols determined by the artificial reception described above
(otherwise function will depend on their current values in the current
session with Mathematica system). So, at such function definition
9
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
expression ℜ should depend only on formal arguments. But in
a number of cases it is quite enough. This function definition is
used to give a more complete view of this object and in certain
practical cases it is indeed used [9-12,16].
Meanwhile, using our procedure [16] with program code:
In[2274]:= Sequences[x__] := Module[{a = Flatten[{x}], b},
b = "Sequence[" <> ToString1[a] <> "]";
a = Flatten[StringPosition[b, {"{", "}"}]];
ToExpression[StringReplace[b, {StringTake[b, {a[[1]],
a[[1]]}] –> "", StringTake[b, {a[[–1]], a[[–1]]}] –> ""}]]]
that extends the standard built-in Sequence function and useful
in many applications, it is possible to represent another way to
define the user functions, modules, and blocks, more precisely
their headers based on constructions of format:
<Function name>@Sequences[formal args] := ℜ
The following a rather simple example illustrates the told:
In[75]:= G@Sequences[a_Integer, b_Symbol, c_] := a+b+c
In[76]:= Definition[G]
Out[76]= G[a_Integer, b_Symbol, c_] := a + b + c
In[77]:= G[6.7, 5, 7]
Out[77]= G[6.7, 5, 7]
In[78]:= G[67, m, 7]
Out[78]= 74 + m
Naturally, in real programming, this definition of functions
is not practical, serving only the purposes of possible methods
of defining said objects. In the meantime, such extension of the
built-in tool allows to compare the capabilities of both tools in
determining the underlying objects of the system.
Along with the above types of functions, the Mathematica
uses also the Compile function intended for compilation of the
functions which calculate numeric expressions at quite certain
assumptions. The Compile function has the 4 formats of coding,
each of which is oriented on a certain compilation type:
Compile[{x1, x2,…}, G] – compiles a function for calculation of
an expression G in the assumption that all values of arguments xj {j =
10
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
1, 2, …} have numerical character;
Compile[{{x1, t1}, {x2, t2}, {x3, t3}, …}, G] – compiles a function
for calculation of an expression G in the assumption that all values of
xj arguments have type tj {j = 1, 2, 3,…} accordingly;
Compile[{{x1, p1, w1}, {x2, p2, w2},…}, J] – compiles a function
for calculation of an expression J in the assumption that values of xj
arguments are wj ranks of array of objects, each of that corresponds to
a type pj {j = 1, 2, 3,…};
Compile[s, W, {{p1, pw1}, {{p2, pw2}, …}] – compiles a function
for calculation of a certain expression W in the assumption that its s
subexpressions that correspond to the pk templates have the pwj types
accordingly {k = 1, 2, 3, …}.
The Compile function processes procedural and functional
objects, matrix operations, numeric functions, functions for lists
processing, etc. Each Compile function generates a special object
CompiledFunction. The function call Compile[…, Evaluate[w]]
is used to specify the fact that w expression should be evaluated
symbolically before compilation. For testing of functions of this
type a rather simple CompileFuncQ function is used [8], whose
call CompileFuncQ[x] returns True if a x represents the Compile
function, and False otherwise. The fragment represents source
code of the CompileFuncQ function with examples of its use.
In[7]:= V := Compile[{{x, _Real}, {y, _Real}}, x*y]; K := (#1*#2) &;
A := Function[{x, y}, x/y]; H[x_] := Block[{}, x]; H[x_, y_] := x + y;
SetAttributes["H", Protected]; P[x__] := Plus[Sequences[{x}]];
GS[x_ /; IntegerQ[x], y_ /; IntegerQ[y]] := Sin[78] + Cos[42];
Sv[x_ /; IntegerQ[x], y_ /; IntegerQ[y]] := x^2 + y^2;
Sv = Compile[{{x, _Integer}, {y, _Real}}, (x + y)^6];
S := Compile[{{x, _Integer}, {y, _Real}}, (x + y)^3];
G = Compile[{{x, _Integer}, {y, _Real}}, (x/y)];
In[8]:= CompileFuncQ[x_] := If[SuffPref[ToString1[Definition3[x]],
"Definition3[CompiledFunction[{", 1], True, False]
In[9]:= Map[CompileFuncQ, {Sv, S, G, V, P, A, K, H, GS, Sv}]
Out[9]= {True, True, True, True, False, False, False, False, False, True}
The CompileFuncQ function expands testing possibilities of
the functional objects in Mathematica, by representing a certain
interest first of all for the system programming.
11
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
Thus, as a reasonably useful version of the built-in Compile
function, one can represent the Compile1 procedure whose call
Compile1[f, x, y] returns a function of the classical type whose
body is defined by an algebraic y expression, whereas f defines
a name of the generated function and x defines the list of types
attributed to the parameters of an expression y. The factual x
argument is specified in the format {{a, Ta}, b, {c, Tc},…}, where
{a, b, c,…} defines parameters of the y expression, whereas {Ta,
Tc,…} defines the testing Q-functions while single elements of x
defines validity of any expression for corresponding parameter.
In[10]:= Compile1[f_ /; SymbolQ[f], x_ /; ListQ[x], y_] :=
Module[{a = ToString1[y], b, c, d, g, h, t}, b = FactualVarsStr1[a];
b = Select[b, ! SameQ[#[[1]], "System`"] &][[1]][[2 ;; –1]];
SetAttributes[g, Listable]; g[t_] := ToString[t];
t = Map[ToString, Map[If[ListQ[#], #[[1]], #] &, x]];
c = ToString[f] <> "["; d = Map[g, x];
Do[h = d[[j]]; If[ListQ[h] && MemberQ[b, h[[1]]],
c = c <> h[[1]] <> "_ /;" <> h[[2]] <> "[" <> h[[1]] <> "],",
If[MemberQ[b, h], c = c <> h <> "_ ,", 77]], {j, Length[d]}];
t = Complement[b, t];
If[t != {}, Do[c = c <> t[[j]] <> "_ ,", {j, Length[t]}], 78];
c = StringTake[c, {1, –2}] <> "] := " <> a; ToExpression[c];
Definition[f]]
In[11]:= Compile1[f, {x, {n, IntegerQ}, {M, RationalQ}, {h, RealQ}},
(Sin[h] + a*x^b)/(c*M – Log[n])]
Out[11]= f[x_, n_/; IntegerQ[n], M_/; RationalQ[M], h_/; RealQ[h],
a_, b_, c_] := (a*x^b + Sin[h])/(c*M – Log[n])
In[12]:= N[f[t, 77, 7/8, 7.8, m, n, p], 3]
Out[12]= (0.998543 + m*t^n)/(–4.34 + 0.875*p)
Fragment above represents source code of the procedure.
1.2. The user pure functions. First of all, we will notice that
so–called functional programming isn't any discovery of the
Mathematica system, and goes back to a number of software
that appeared long before the above system. In this regard, it is
pertinently focused slightly more in details the attention on the
concept of functional programming in historical aspect. While
12
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
here we only will note certain moments characterizing specifics
of the paradigm of functional programming. We will note only
that the foundation of functional programming has been laid
approximately at the same time, as imperative programming that
is the most widespread now, i.e. in the thirties years of the last
century. A. Church (USA) – the author of λ–calculus and one of
founders of the concept of Cellular Automata in connection with
his works in field of infinite automata and mathematical logic
along with H. Curry (England) and M. Schönfinkel (Germany) that
have developed the mathematical theory of combinators, with
good reason can be considered as the founders of mathematical
foundation of functional programming. In additiom, functional
programming languages, especially the purely functional ones
such as the Hope and Rex, have largely been used in academical
circles rather than in commercial software. Whereas prominent
functional programming languages such as Lisp have been used
in the industrial and commercial applications. Today, functional
programming paradigm is also supported in a number of domainspecific programming languages, for example, by the Mathem–
language of the Mathematica. From a rather large number of
languages of functional programming it is possible to note the
following languages that exerted a great influence on progress
in this field, namely: Lisp, Scheme, ISWIM, family ML, Miranda,
Haskell, etc. By and large, if the imperative languages are based
on operations of assignment and cycle, the functional languages
on recursions. The most important advantages of the functional
languages are considered in our books in detail [8-14], namely:
– programs on functional languages as a rule are much shorter
and simpler than their analogues on the imperative languages;
– almost all modern functional languages are strictly typified and
ensure the safety of programs; at that, the strict typification allows to
generate more effective code;
– in a functional language the functions can be transferred as an
argument to other functions or are returned as result of their calls;
– in pure functional languages (which aren't allowing by–effects
for the functions) there is no an operator of assigning, the objects of
13
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
such language can't be modified or deleted, it is only possible to create
new objects by decomposition and synthesis of the existing objects. In
the pure functional languages all functions are free from by–effects.
Meanwhile, functional languages can imitate certain useful
imperative properties. Not every functional languages are pure
forasmuch in a lot of cases the admissibility of by–effects allows
to essentially simplify programming. However today the most
developed functional languages are as a rule pure. With many
interesting enough questions concerning a subject of functional
programming, the reader can familiarize oneself, for example,
in [15]. Whereas with an quite interesting critical remarks on
functional languages and possible ways of their elimination it
is possible to familiarize oneself in [8-15,22].
A number of concepts and paradigms are quite specific for
functional programming and absent in imperative programming.
Meanwhile, many programming languages, as a rule, are based
on several paradigms of programming, in particular imperative
programming languages can succesfully use also concepts of
functional programming. In particular, as an important enough
concept are so–called the pure functions, whose results of run
depends only on their actual arguments. Such functions possess
certain useful properties a part of which it is possible to use for
optimization of program code and parallelization of calculations.
In principle, there are no special difficulties for programming
in the functional style in languages that aren't the functional.
The Mathematica language supports the mixed paradigm of
functional and procedural programming. We will consider the
elements of functional programming in Mathematica in whose
basis the concept of the pure function lays. The pure functions –
one of the basic concepts of functional programming which is a
component of programming system in Mathematica in general.
Typically, when a function is called, its name is specified,
whereas pure functions allow to specify functions which can be
applied to arguments without having to define their explicit
names. If a certain function G is used repeatedly, then can
define the function using definition, considered above, and
14
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
refer to the function by its name G. On the other hand, if some
function is intend to use only once, then will probably find it
better to give the function in format of pure function without
ever naming it. The reader that is familiar with formal logic or
the LISP programming language, will recognize Mathematica
pure functions as being like λ expressions or not named functions.
Note, that pure functions are also close to the pure mathematical
notion of operators. Mathematica uses the following formats
for definition of pure functions, namely:
(a)
(b)
(c)
Function[x, body]
Function[{x1, x2, …, xn}, body]
body &
Format (a) determines pure function in which x in function
body is replaced by any given argument. An arbitrary admissible
expression from variable x, including also constants and calls of
functions acts as a body. Format (b) determines a pure function
in which variables x1, x2, …, xn in function body is replaced by
the corresponding arguments. Whereas format (с) determines a
function body containing formal arguments denoted as # or #1,
#2, #3, etc. It is so-called short format. Note, the pure functions
of formats (a), (b) do not allow to use the typification mechanism
for formal arguments similarly to the classical functions, namely
constructs of type "h_..." are not allowed. This is a very serious
difference between pure function and classical function whereas
otherwise, already when evaluating the definition of any pure
function with typed formal arguments, Mathematica identifies
the erroneous situations.
The calls of pure functions of the above formats are defined
according to simple examples below, namely:
In[2162]:= Function[x, x^2 + 42][25]
Out[2162]= 667
In[2163]:= Function[{x, y, z}, x^2 + y^2 + z^2][42, 75, 77]
Out[2163]= 13318
In[2164]:= #1^2 + #2^2 &[900, 50]
Out[2164]= 812500
In[2165]:= Function[x_Integer, x^2 + 42]
Function::flpar: Parameter specification x_Integer in ….
15
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
When Function[body] or body & is applied to a set of formal
arguments, # (or #1) is replaced by the first argument, #2 by the
second, and so on while #0 is replaced by the function itself. If
there are more arguments than #j in the function supplied, the
remaining arguments are ignored. At that, ## defines sequence
of all given arguments, whereas ##n stands for arguments from
number n onward. Function has attribute HoldAll and function
body is evaluated only after the formal arguments have been
replaced by actual arguments. Function construct can be nested
in any way. Each is treated as a scoping construct, with named
inner variables being renamed if necessary. Furthermore, in the
call Function[args, body, attrs] as optional argument attrs can
be a single attribute or a list of attributes, e.g. HoldAll, Protected
and so on, while the call Function[Null, body, attrs] represents
a function in which the arguments in function body are given
using slot #, etc. Such format of a pure function is very useful
when a one–time call of the function is required.
Note that unlike the format (c), the formats (a) and (b) of a
pure function allow use as the body rather complex program
constructions, including local variables, cycles, definitions of
blocks, modules and functions. A fairly simple example quite
visually illustrates what has been said:
In[7]:= {a, b} = {0, 0}
Out[7]= {0, 0}
In[8]:= Function[{x, y, z}, Save["tmp", {a, b}]; {a, b} = {42, 47};
g[h_, g_] := h*g;
If[x <= 6, Do[Print[{a, b, y^z}], z], x+y+z]; {(a+b)*(x+y+z)+
g[42, 47], Get["tmp"], DeleteFile["tmp"]}[[1]]][1, 2, 3]
{42, 47, 8}
{42, 47, 8}
{42, 47, 8}
Out[8]= 2508
In[9]:= {a, b}
Out[9]= {0, 0}
In[10]:= g[42, 47]
Out[10]= 1974
16
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
So, in the given example the locality of variables a and b is
provided with saving their initial (up to a function call) values at
the time of function call by their saving in the temporary "tmp"
file, their redefinitions in the course of execution of a function
body with the subsequent uploading of initial values of a and b
from the "tmp" file to the current session of Mathematica with
removal of the "tmp" file from the file system of the computer.
Such mechanism completely answers the principle of locality of
variables in a function body. This example also illustrates the
ability to define a new function in the body of a pure function
with its use, both within the body of the source function and
outside of the function.
At using of the pure functions, unlike traditional functions,
there is no need to designate their names, allowing to code their
definitions directly in points of their call that is caused by that
the results of the calls of pure functions depend only on values
of the actual arguments received by them. Selection from a list
x of elements that satisfy certain conditions and elementwise
application of a function to elements of the list x can be done by
constructions of the view Select[x, test[#] &] and Map[F[#] &, x]
respectively as illustrate the following examples, namely:
In[3336]:= Select[{a, 72, 77, 42, 67, 2019, s, 47, 500}, OddQ[#] &]
Out[3336]= {77, 67, 2019, 47}
In[3337]:= Map[(#^2 + #) &, {1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12}]
Out[3337]= {2, 6, 12, 20, 30, 42, 56, 72, 90, 110, 132, 156}
At use of the short form of a pure function it is necessary to
be careful at its coding because the ampersand (&) has quite low
priority. For example, expression #1 + #2 – #3 + #2*#4 & without
parentheses is correct whereas, in general, they are obligatory,
in particular, at use of a pure function as the right part of a rule
as illustrate very simple examples [10-12]. The universal format
of a call of pure f function is defined as f @@ {args}, for instance:
In[4214]:= OddQ[#] || PrimeQ[#] || IntegerQ[#] & @@ {77}
Out[4214]= True
In combination with a number of functions, in particular,
Map, Select and some others the use of pure functions is rather
17
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
convenient, therefore the question of converting the traditional
functions into the pure functions seems an quite topical; for its
decision various approaches, including creation of the program
converters can be used. Thus, we used pure functions a rather
widely at programming of a lot of problems of various types of
the applied, and the system character [1-16,22].
Unlike a number of convertors of classical functions to pure
function, procedure below allows to keep the testing functions
of the general kind for arguments of the converted functions
W[x_ /; Test[x], y_H, z_, h__H1, t__, …] := ℜ[x, y, z, h, t, …]
by converting of a classical W function to pure function of short
format, i.e. the procedure call FuncToPureFunction[W] returns
the pure function in the following kind
If[Test[#1] && HQ[#2] && True && H1Q[#4] && True && …,
ℜ[#1, #2, #3, #4, #5, …], IncorrectArgs[Sequential numbers of
incorrect factual arguments]] &
where {heads H and H1} can absent. In addition, for arguments
of type {h__H1, t__} the resultant pure function considers only
their first factual value. At the same time, only one of the {Real,
List, Complex, Integer, Rational, String, Symbol} list is allowed as a
head H for a y expression. In a case of inadmissibility of at least
one argument and/or its testing (for example, incorrect head H or
H1) the call of the pure function returns the formal call of the
kind IncorrectArgs[n1, n2,…, np], where {n1, n2,…, np} determine
sequential numbers of incorrect arguments. With source code
of the FuncToPureFunction procedure with typical examples of
its application that a quite clearly illustrate the results returned
by the procedure can be found below [8-12,16].
In[5]:= FuncToPureFunction[x_ /; FunctionQ[x]] :=
Module[{a, b = ProcBody[x], c = 1, d, g, h, p, s = Map[ToString,
{Complex, Integer, List, Rational, Real, String, Symbol}]},
a = ArgsBFM1[x]; g = Map[{Set[d, "#" <> ToString[c++]]; d,
StringReplaceVars[#[[2]], #[[1]] –> d]} &, a];
h = Map[If[! StringFreeQ[#[[2]], #[[1]]], #[[2]],
If[#[[2]] == "Arbitrary", "True", If[MemberQ[s, #[[2]]], #[[2]] <>
"Q[" <> #[[1]] <> "]", "False"]]] &, g];
18
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
p = Map["(" <> # <> ")" &, h]; p = Riffle[p, "&&"];
a = Map[#[[1]] &, a]; c = Map[#[[1]] &, g];
a = StringReplaceVars[b, GenRules[a, c]];
ToExpression["If[" <> p <> "," <> a <> "," <>
"IncorrectArgs@@Flatten[Position[" <>
ToString[h] <> ", False]]" <> "]&"]]
In[6]:= f[x_ /; IntegerQ[x], y_ /; y == 77, z_List, t_, p__, h___] :=
x*y*h + Length[z]*t
In[7]:= FuncToPureFunction[f]
Out[7]= If[IntegerQ[#1] && #2 == 77 && ListQ[#3] && True &&
True && True, #1*#2*#6 + Length[#3]*#4,
IncorrectArgs @@ Flatten[Position[{IntegerQ[#1], #2 == 77,
ListQ[#3], True, True, True}, False]]] &
It should be noted that pure functions allow for a kind of
parameterization based on constructions of the following format:
<Name[params]> := <Pure function, containing params>
where Name – a name of pure function and params determines
parameters entering the function body. Calls of pure functions
parameterized in this way have the following format:
Name[params][actual args]
The following simple example illustrates the told:
In[2215]:= T[n_, m_] := Function[{x, y, z}, n*(x + m*y + z)]
In[2216]:= T[42, 47][1, 2, 3]
Out[2216]= 4116
In[2217]:= G[p_, n_] := p*(#1^2 + #2^2*#3^n) &
In[2218]:= G[5, 2][5, 6, 7]
Out[2218]= 8945
In[2219]:= With[{p=5, n=2}, p*(#1^2 + #2^2*#3^n) &][5,6,7]
Out[2219]= 8945
In a number of applications such parameterization is quite
useful, allowing to customize the tool for application based on
parameter values. Some useful tools for working with the user
functions are presented below, whereas a wider range of such
tools are available for classical functions which are suitable also
for many user procedure processing. This should be borne in
mind when discussing issues related to the procedures.
19
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
1.3. Some useful tools for work with the user functions. For
work with functions Mathematica has a wide range of tools for
working with functions, including user ones. Here we present a
number of tools for working with user functions that do not go
to the standard set. First of all, it is of particular interest to test a
symbol or expression to be a function. Some of the tools in this
direction are presented in our package MathToolBox [16,9-12].
The most common tool of this type is the function FunctionQ,
whose definition in turn contains QFunction and QFunction1
procedures and function PureFuncQ of the same type, whose
call on a symbol or expression x returns True, if x is a function
and False otherwise. Program code of the FunctionQ function
can be presented as follows:
In[25]:= FunctionQ[x_] := If[StringQ[x], QFunction1[x] ||
PureFuncQ[ToExpression[x]], PureFuncQ[x] || QFunction[x]]
In[26]:= y := #1^2 + #2^2 &; {FunctionQ[#1^2 + #2^2 &],
FunctionQ[y]}
Out[26]= {True, True}
In[27]:= z = Function[{x, y, z}, If[x <= 6, Do[Print[y^z], z],
x + y + z]];
In[28]:= FunctionQ[Function[{x, y, z}, If[x <= 6,
Do[Print[y^z], z], x + y + z]]]
Out[28]= True
In[29]:= FunctionQ[z]
Out[29]= True
In[30]:= PureFuncQ[Function[{x, y, z}, If[x <= 6,
Do[Print[y^z], z], x + y + z]]]
Out[30]= True
In[31]:= PureFuncQ[#1^2 + #2^2 &]
Out[31]= True
In[32]:= G[x_] := Plus[Sequences[x]]
In[33]:= {FunctionQ[G], PureFuncQ[G]}
Out[33]= {True, False}
At the same time, the function call PureFuncQ[w] allows to
identify object w to be a pure function, returning True, if w is a
pure function, and False otherwise. This tool along with others
provide strict differentiation of such basic element of functional
and procedural programming, as a function [8-16].
20
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
The question of determining the formal arguments of user
function is of quite certain interest. Built-in tools of the system
do not directly solve this issue and we have created a number
of tools for the purpose of determining the formal arguments of
the function, module and block. For a function, this problem is
solved e.g. by the ArgsF function with program code:
In[47]:= ArgsF[x_] := If[PureFuncQ[x], ArgsPureFunc[x],
If[FunctionQ[x], Args[x], ToString1[x] <> " – not function"]]
In[48]:= GS@Sequences[a_Integer, b_Symbol, c_] := a+b+c
In[49]:= ArgsF[GS]
Out[49]= {a_Integer, b_Symbol, c_}
In[50]:= H := #1^2 + #2^2*#3^4 &
In[51]:= ArgsF[H]
Out[51]= {"#1", "#2", "#3"}
In[52]:= T := Function[{x, y, z}, x + y + z]; ArgsF[T]
Out[52]= {"x", "y", "z"}
In[53]:= ArgsF[Agn]
Out[53]= "Agn – not function"
The call ArgsF[x] returns the list of formal arguments in the
string format of function x, including pure function, if x is not a
function, the call returns the corresponding message. The ArgsF
function uses the testing tools FunctionQ and PureFuncQ along
with tools Args, ArgsPureFunc, and ToString1 with which it is
possible to get acquainted in [1-12], while the interested reader
can get acquainted here with a number of tools (that complement
the built-in system tools) for work with the user functions.
For converting of a pure function of formats (a) and (b) to
format (c) the PureFuncToShort procedure with the following
program code serves:
In[4220]:= PureFuncToShort[x_ /; PureFuncQ[x]] :=
Module[{a, b, c, d},
If[ShortPureFuncQ[x], x, a = ArgsPureFunc[x]; d = a;
b = Map[ToExpression, a]; Map[ClearAll, a];
a = Map[ToExpression, a];
c = Quiet[GenRules[a, Range2[#, Length[a]]]];
{ToExpression[ToString1[ReplaceAll[x[[2]], c]] <> "&"],
21
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
ToExpression[ToString[d] <> "=" <> ToString1[b]]}[[1]]]]
In[4221]:= G := Function[{x, y, z}, p*(x + y + z)];
In[4222]:= PureFuncToShort[G]
Out[4222]= p*(#1 + #2 + #3) &
The procedure call PureFuncToShort[w] returns the result
of converting of a pure function w to its short format. In turn,
the PureFuncToFunction procedure is intended for converting
of a pure function to classical. The following example presents
its program code with a simple example of its application:
In[7]:= PureFuncToFunction[x_/; PureFuncQ[x], y_/; !HowAct[y]]:=
Module[{a = ArgsPureFunc[x], b, c},
If[ShortPureFuncQ[x], b = (StringReplace[#1, "#" –> "x"] &) /@ a;
c = StringReplace[ToString1[x], GenRules[a, b]];
b = ToExpression /@ Sort[(#1 <> "_" &) /@ b];
ToExpression[ToString1[y[Sequences[b]]] <> ":=" <>
StringTake[c, {1, –3}]], a = (#1 <> "_" &) /@ a;
ToExpression[ToString1[y[Sequences[ToExpression /@ a]]] <> ":="
<> ToString1[x[[2]]]]]]
In[8]:= t := p*(#1^2 + #2^2*#3^n) &
In[9]:= PureFuncToFunction[t, H]
In[10]:= Definition[H]
Out[10]= H[x1_, x2_, x3_] := p*(x1^2 + x2^2*x3^n)
The procedure call with two arguments x and H where x - a
pure function and H – an undefined symbol, converts the pure
x function to a classical function named H.
We have programmed a number of procedures that ensure
the mutual conversion of classical, pure and pure functions of
the short format. In particular, the CfToPure procedure allows
the classical functions to be converted into pure functions of the
short format [12-16]. Calling the CfToPure[f] procedure returns
the result of converting a classical function f to its equivalent in
the form of a pure function of short format. The procedure uses
a number of techniques useful in practical programming, which
are recommended to the reader. The fragment below represents
source code of the CfToPure procedure and examples of its use.
In[4]:= {x, y, z} = {42, 47, 67};
22
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
In[5]:= F[x_Integer, y_, z_ /; IntegerQ[z]] := (x^2 + y^3) +
(y^2 – x*y*z)/Sqrt[x^2 + y^2 + z^2]
In[6]:= CfToPure[f_ /; FunctionQ[f]] := Module[{a, b, c, d},
a = Map[ToString[#] <> "@" &, Args[f]];
a = Map[StringReplace[#, "_" ~~ ___ ~~ "@" –> ""] &, a];
d = "###"; Save2[d, a];
b = Map["#" <> ToString[#] &, Range[Length[a]]];
Map[Clear, a]; c = GenRules[a, b];
c = Map[ToExpression[#[[1]]] –> ToExpression[#[[2]]] &, c];
a = StringReplace[Definition2[f][[1]],
Headings[f][[2]] <> " := " –> ""]; a = ToExpression[a <> " &"];
{ReplaceAll[c][a], Get[d], DeleteFile[d]}[[1]]]
In[7]:= CfToPure[F]
Out[7]= (x^2 + y^3) + (y^2 – x*y*z)/Sqrt[x^2 + y^2 + z^2] &
In[8]:= {x, y, z}
Out[8]= {42, 47, 67}
In[9]:= G[x_Integer, y_List, z_ /; IntegerQ[z]] := N[Sin[x]/
Log[Length[y]] + (y^2 – x*y*z)^(x+z)/Sqrt[x^2+y^2+z^2]]
In[10]:= CfToPure[G]
Out[10]= N[Sin[#1]/Log[Length[#2]] + (#2^2 – #1*#2*#3)^
(#1 + #3)/Sqrt[#1^2 + #2^2 + #3^2]] &
As in a function body along with formal arguments global
variables and calls of functions can enter, then the problem of
determination them is of a certain interest to any function. In
this regard the GlobalsInFunc function can be useful enough
with the following program code:
In[2223]:= VarsInFunc[x_] := Complement[Select[VarsInExpr[
ToString2[Definition[x]]], ! SystemQ[#] &],
{ToString[x]}, ArgsBFM[x]]
GlobalsInFunc[x_] := If[PureFuncQ[x],
Complement[VarsInExpr[x], Flatten[{ArgsPureFunc[x],
"Function"}]], If[FunctionQ[x], VarsInFunc[x],
"Argument – not function"]]
In[2224]:= F[x_, y_, z_] := a*x*b*y + N[Sin[2019]]
In[2225]:= GlobalsInFunc[F]
23
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
Out[2225]= {"a", "b"}
In[2226]:= G := Function[{x, y, z}, p*(x + y + z)];
In[2227]:= GlobalsInFunc[G]
Out[2227]= {"p"}
In[2228]:= T := p*(#1^2 + #2^2*#3^n) &
In[2229]:= GlobalsInFunc[T]
Out[2229]= {"n", "p"}
The call GlobalsInFunc[x] returns the list of global symbols
in string format entering a function x definition (pure or classical)
and other than the built-in symbols of Mathematica, if x is not a
function, than the call returns the corresponding message. The
function uses the tools of our MathToolBox package [7,8,16], in
particular the function whose call VarsInFunc[x] returns the list
of global symbols in string format entering a classical function x
definition and other than the built-in symbols of the system.
Generally, the user functions do not allow to use the local
variables, however a simple artificial reception allows to do it.
Sequential list structure of execution of operations when the list
is evaluated element–wise from left to right is for this purpose
used, i.e. function is represented in the following format:
Name[args] := {Save["#", {locals}], {locals = values}, function
body, Get["#"], DeleteFile["#"]}[[3]]
The presented format is rather transparent and well illustrates
essence of the method of use in user function of local variables.
The following simple example illustrates told:
In[9]:= GS[x_, y_, z_] := {Save["#", {a, b, c}], {a=2, b=7, c=6},
a*x + b + y + c*z, Get["#"], DeleteFile["#"]}[[3]]
In[10]:= {a, b, c} = {1, 2, 3}
Out[10]= {1, 2, 3}
In[11]:= GS[42, 47, 67]
Out[11]= 540
In[12]:= {a, b, c}
Out[12]= {1, 2, 3}
In some cases, the given approach may prove to be quite useful
in practical programming.
24
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
Meanwhile, a rather significant remark needs to be made
regarding the objects multiplicity of definitions with the same
name. As noted repeatedly, Mathematica system differentiates
objects, above all, by their headers, if any. It is therefore quite
real that we may deal with different definitions under the same
name. This applies to all objects that have headers. In view of
this circumstance, we have programmed a number of tools for
various cases of application [1-16]. First of all, we need a tool of
testing the presence of such multiplicity for a particular object
(function, module, block). This function is successfully performed
by the MultipleQ procedure with program code:
In[47]:= MultipleQ[x_ /; SymbolQ[x], j___] := Module[{a},
a = ToString[InputForm[Definition[x]]];
a = StringReplace[a, "\n \n" → "\[CircleDot]"];
a = StringSplit[a, "\[CircleDot]"];
If[{j} != {} && !ValueQ[j], j=a]; If[Length[a] > 1, True, False]]
In[48]:= G[x_, y_] := p*(x^2 + y^2); G[x_Integer, y_] := x*y
G[x_, y_, z_] := x^2 + y^2 + z^2; G[x_, y_List] := x*y
In[49]:= MultipleQ[G, gs]
Out[49]= True
In[50]:= gs
Out[50]= {"G[x_Integer, y_] := x*y", "G[x_, y_List] := x*y",
"G[x_, y_] := p*(x^2+y^2)", "G[x_, y_, z_] := x^2+y^2+z^2"}
In[53]:= MultipleQ1[x_ /; SymbolQ[x], j___] :=
Module[{a = Definition2[x]},
If[{j} != {} && ! HowAct[j], j = a[[1 ;; –2]], 77];
If[Length[a[[1 ;; –2]]] == 1, False, True]]
In[54]:= MultipleQ2[x_Symbol] := If[Length[ToExpression[
Unique1[Definition2[x], j]][[1 ;; –2]]] > 1, True, False]
The call MultipleQ[x] returns True if symbol x has multiple
definitions, and False otherwise. Through optional j argument
the list of x definitions in string format is returned. MultipleQ1
and MultipleQ2 tools – functional analogues of the MultipleQ.
At last, quite natural interest represents the existence of the
user procedures and functions activated in the current session.
Solution of the question can be received by tool of a procedure
whose call ActBFMuserQ[] returns True if such objects exist in
25
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
the current session, and False otherwise; the call ActBFMuserQ[x]
thru optional x argument – an undefinite variable – returns the 2–
element nested list whose the first element contains name of the
user object in the string format while the second defines list of
its types in string format respectively. The fragment represents
source code of the ActBFMuserQ with an example of its use.
In[7]:= ActBFMuserQ[x___ /; If[{x} == {}, True, If[Length[{x}] == 1
&& ! HowAct[x], True, False]]] := Module[{b = {}, c = 1, d, h,
a = Select[Names["`*"], ! UnevaluatedQ[Definition2, #] &]},
For[c, c <= Length[a], c++, h = Quiet[ProcFuncTypeQ[a[[c]]]];
If[h[[1]], AppendTo[b, {a[[c]], h[[–1]]}], Null]];
If[b == {}, False, If[{x} != {}, x = ReduceLists[b]]; True]]
In[8]:= V := Compile[{{x, _Real}, {y, _Real}}, (x^3 + y)^2];
Art := Function[{x, y}, x*Sin[y]]; K := (#1^2 + #2^4) &;
GS[x_ /; IntegerQ[x], y_ /; IntegerQ[y]] := Sin[90] + Cos[42];
G = Compile[{{x, _Integer}, {y, _Real}}, x*y];
H[x_] := Block[{}, x]; H[x_, y_] := x + y;
SetAttributes["H", Protected]; P[x_] := Module[{}, x];
P[y_] := Module[{}, y]; P[x__] := Plus[Sequences[{x}]];
T42[x_, y_, z_] := x*y*z; R[x_] := Module[{a = 590}, x*a];
GSV := (#1^2 + #2^4 + #3^6) &
In[9]:= ActBFMuserQ[]
Out[9]= True
In[10]:= {ActBFMuserQ[t77], t77}
Out[10]= {True, {{"Art", {"PureFunction"}},
{"G", {"CompiledFunction"}}, {"GS", {"Function"}},
{"H", {"Block", "Function"}}, {"P1", {"Function"}},
{"R", {"Module"}}, {"K", "ShortPureFunction"},
{"V", {"CompiledFunction"}},
{"P", {"Module", "Module", "Function"}, {"T42", {"Function"}},
{"GSV", "ShortPureFunction"}}}}
The ActBFMuserQ procedure is of interest as an useful tool
first of all in the system programming.
Along with the presented tools a number of other useful
tools for working with user functions and instructive examples
of their application can be found in [1-16]. Here again it should
be noted that the examples of tools presented in this book use
26
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
the tools of the mentioned MathToolBox package [16] that has
freeware license. Given that this package and its tools will be
frequently mentioned below, we will briefly describe it.
The package contains more than 1320 tools which eliminate
restrictions of a number of the standard Mathematica tools and
expand its software with new tools. In this context, the package
can serve as a certain additional tool of modular programming,
especially useful in numerous applications where certain non–
standard evaluations have to accompany programming. At the
same time, tools presented in the package have the most direct
relation to certain principal questions of procedure–functional
programming in Mathematica, not only for decision of applied
tasks, but, above all, for programming of software extending
frequently used facilities of the system and/or eliminating their
defects or extending the system with new facilities. Software
presented in this package contains a number of useful enough
and effective receptions of programming in Mathematica, and
extends its software which allows in the system to programme
the tasks of various purpose more simply and effectively. The
additional tools composing the above package embrace a rather
wide cyrcle of sections of the Mathematica system [15,16].
The given package contains definitions of some functionally
equivalent tools programmed in various ways useful for use in
practical programming. Along with this, they illustrate a lot of
both efficient and undocumented features of Math-language of
the system. In our opinion, the detailed analysis of source code
of the package software can be a rather effective remedy on the
path of the deeper mastering of programming in Mathematica.
Experience of holding of the master classes of various levels on
the systems Mathematica and Maple in all evidence confirms
expediency of joint use of both standard tools of the systems of
computer mathematics, and the user tools created in the course
of programming of various appendices. A lot of tools contained
in the package and mentioned below were described in [1-15]
in detail enough. We now turn to the procedural objects of the
Mathematica system.
27
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
Chapter 2: The user procedures in Mathematica
Procedure is one of basic concepts of programming system
of Mathematica, being not less important object in systems of
programming as a whole. A procedure is an object implementing
the well-known concept of "black box" when with known input
(actual arguments) and output (returned result) while the internal
structure of the object, generally speaking, is closed. Procedure
forms the basis of the so-called "procedural programming" where
in the future by the procedure we will understand such objects
as module and block. Procedural programming is one of basic
paradigms of Mathematica which in an essential degree differs
from similar paradigm of the well-known traditional procedural
programming languages. This circumstance is the cornerstone
of certain system problems relating to procedural programming
in Mathematica. Above all, similar problems arise in the field
of distinctions in implementation of the above paradigms in the
Mathematica and in the environment of traditional procedural
languages. Along with that, unlike a number of traditional and
built-in languages the built-in Math–language has no a number
of useful enough tools for operating with procedural objects. In
our books [1-15] and MathToolBox package [16] are presented
some such tools.
A number of the problems connected with similar tools is
considered in the present chapter with preliminary discussion
of the concept of `procedure` in Mathematica system as bases of
its procedural paradigm. In addition, tools of analysis of this
section concern only the user procedures and functions because
definitions of all built–in system functions (unlike, say, from the
Maple system) from the user are hidden, i.e. are inaccessible for
processing by the standard tools of Mathematica system. Note
that the discussion of procedural objects will take place relative
to the latest version of Mathematica 12.1, which can dissonance
with Mathematica of earlier versions. However this should not
cause any serious misunderstandings. Math-language possesses
a rather high level of immutability in relation to its versions.
28
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
2.1. Definition of procedures in Mathematica software
Procedures in Mathematica system are formally represented
by program objects of the following 2 simple formats, namely:
M[x_ /; Testx, y_ /; Testy, ...] {:= | =} Module[{locals}, Module Body]
B[x_ /; Testx, y_ /; Testy, ...] {:= | =} Block[{locals}, Block Body]
i.e., procedures of both types represent the functions from
two arguments – the procedure body (Body) and local variables
(locals). Local variables – the list of names, perhaps, with initial
values which are attributed to them. These variables have the
local character concerning the procedure, i.e. their values aren't
crossed with values of the symbols of the same name outside of
the procedure. All other variables in the procedure have global
character, sharing field of variables of the Mathematica current
session. In addition, in the procedure definition it is possible to
distinguish six following component, namely:
– procedure name (M and B in the both procedures definitions);
– procedure heading ({M|B}[x_ /; Testx, y_ /; Testy, ...] in the both
procedures definitions);
– procedural brackets (Module[…] and Block[…]);
– local variables (list of local variables {locals}; can be empty list);
– procedure (Module, Block) body; can be empty;
– testing Testx function (the function call Test[x] returns True or
False depend on permissibility of an actual x argument; can absent).
When programmed, we typically try to program tasks as
modular programs as possible to make them more readable and
independent, and more convenient to maintain. One of ways of
a solution of the given problem is use of the scope mechanism
for variables, defining for them separate scopes. Mathematica
provides 2 basic mechanisms for limiting the scope of variables
in form of modules and blocks, hereinafter referred to as general
term – procedures. Procedures along with functions play a decisive
role in solving the issue of optimal organization of program code.
Note, real programming uses modules much more frequently,
but blocks are often more convenient in interactive programming.
29
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
Most traditional programming languages use a so–called
"lexical scoping" mechanism for variables, which is analogous to
the mechanism of modules in Mathematica. Whereas symbolic
programming languages e.g. LISP allow also "dynamic scoping",
analogous to the mechanism used by blocks in Mathematica.
When lexical scoping is used, variables are treated as local ones
to a particular part of a program code. At a dynamic scoping, the
values of the allocated variables are local only to a certain part
of the program execution. A Module carries out processing of
the body when it is carried out as a component of the general
program code, any variable from locals in the module body is
considered as local one. Then natural execution of the general
program code continues. A Block, ignoring all expressions of a
body, uses for it the current values of variables from locals. In
the course of execution of body the block uses values of locals for
variables, then recovers their original values after completion of
the body. Most vividly these differences an example illustrates:
In[2254]:= {b, c} = {m, n};
In[2255]:= B[x_] := Block[{a = 7, b, c}, x*(a + b + c)]; B[7]
Out[2255]= 7*(7 + m + n)
In[2256]:= {b, c}
Out[2256]= {m, n}
In[2257]:= LocVars[x_String] := ToExpression[x <> "$" <>
ToString[$ModuleNumber – 4]]
In[2258]:= M[x_] := Module[{a = 7, b, c}, x*(a + b + c)]; M[7]
Out[2258]= 7*(7 + b$21248 + c$21248)
In[2259]:= Map[LocVars, {"a", "b", "c"}]
Out[2259]= {a$21248, b$21248, c$21248}
Thus, Module is a scoping construct that implements lexical
scoping, while Block is a scoping construct implements dynamic
scoping of local variables. Module creates new symbols to name
each of its local variables every time it is called. Call of LocVars
function immediately after calling a module (not containing calls
of other modules) with local variables {a, b, c,...} returns the list of
variables Map[LocVars, {"a", "b", "c",...}] that were generated at
the time the module was called.
30
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
In the context of testing blocks for procedural nature in the
above sense, the LocVars1 procedure may be of interest whose
call LocVars1[x] returns True if x is a module or a block x has no
local variables without initial values, or the list of local variables
is empty, otherwise False is returned. While calling LocVars1[x,y]
with the 2nd optional argument y – an indefined symbol – through
y additionally returns the 2-element list whose the first element
defines the list of all local variables of x, while the 2nd element
defines the list of local variables without initial values. Below,
fragment represents source code of the procedure with its use.
In[4]:= LocVars1[x_ /; BlockModQ[x], y___] := Module[{a, b, d = {}},
a = Locals5[x, b];
Do[AppendTo[d, If[Length[b[[k]]] < 2, a[[k]], Nothing]],
{k, Length[a]}]; If[{y} != {} && SymbolQ[y], y = {a, d}, 7];
If[ModuleQ[x], True, If[a == d, True, False]]]
In[5]:= B[x_] := Block[{a = 7, b, c = 8, d}, x*a*b*c*d];
B1[x_] := Block[{a, b, c, d}, x*a*b*c*d]
In[6]:= {LocVars1[B, t1], t1}
Out[6]= {False, {{"a = 7", "b", "c = 8", "d"}, {"b", "d"}}}
In[7]:= {LocVars1[B1, t2], t2}
Out[7]= {True, {{"a", "b", "c", "d"}, {"a", "b", "c", "d"}}}
In[8]:= G[x_] := Block[{}, x^2]; {LocVars1[G, t72], t72}
Out[8]= {True, {{}, {}}}
Considering importance of modular approach to software
organization when a program code consists of set of the linked
independent objects and reaction of objects is defined only by
their inputs, in this quality to us the most preferable the modules
are presented. In general software code of the modular structure,
the output of the module is the input for another module. For
this reason the lion share of tools of our package MathToolBox
[16] is programmed in the form of modules.
Once again, pertinently to pay attention to one moment. A
number of tools represented in the package are focused on the
solution of identical problems, but they use various algorithms
programmed with usage of various approaches. They not only
illustrate variety of useful enough receptions but also revealing
their shortcomings and advantages useful both in practical and
31
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
system programming. In our opinion, such approach opens a
rather wide field for awakening of creative activity of the reader
in respect of improvement of his skills in the programming in
Mathematica system. Now let's consider module components
in more detail.
Let's note that in certain cases duplication of definitions of
blocks, modules and functions under new names on condition
of saving their former definitions invariable is required. So, for
assignment of a name that is unique in the current session to the
new means, the procedure whose call DupDef[x] returns a name
(unique in the current session) whose definition will be equivalent
to definition of the x symbol can be used. In addition, the given
procedure successfully works with the means having multiple
definitions too. The following fragment represents source code
of the procedure with an example of its application.
In[3331]:= DupDef[x_ /; BlockFuncModQ[x]] :=
Module[{a = Flatten[{Definition1[x]}],
b = Unique[ToString[x]]},
ToExpression[Map[StringReplace[#, ToString[x] <> "[" –>
ToString[b] <> "[", 1] &, a]]; b]
In[3332]:= Gs[x_, y_] := x + y
In[3333]:= Gs[x_] := Module[{a = 77}, a*x^2]
In[3334]:= DupDef[Gs]
Out[3334]= Gs78
In[3335]:= Definition[Gs78]
Out[3335]= Gs78[x_, y_] := x + y
Gs78[x_] := Module[{a = 77}, a*x^2]
In particular, the DupDef procedure is useful enough when
debugging of the user software.
The call Definition[x] of the standard function in a number
of cases returns the definition of some x object with the context
corresponding to it what at a rather large definitions becomes
badly foreseeable and less acceptable for subsequent program
processing as evidently illustrates a number of examples [6-15].
Moreover, the name of an object or its string format also can act
as an actual argument. For elimination of this shortcoming we
32
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
defined a number of tools allowing to obtain definitions of the
procedures or functions in a certain optimized format. As such
means it is possible to note the following: DefOptimum, DefFunc,
Definition1, Definition2, Definition3 ÷ Definition5, DefFunc1, DefOpt,
DefFunc2 and DefFunc3. These means along with some others are
represented in [4-9] and included in the MathToolBox package
[16]. The following fragment represents the source code of the
most used tool of them with an example of its application.
In[49]:= Definition2[x_ /; SameQ[SymbolQ[x], HowAct[x]]] :=
Module[{a, b = Attributes[x], c},
If[SystemQ[x], Return[{"System", Attributes[x]}],
Off[Part::partw]]; ClearAttributes[x, b];
Quiet[a = ToString[InputForm[Definition[x]]];
Mapp[SetAttributes, {Rule, StringJoin}, Listable];
c = StringReplace[a, Flatten[{Rule[StringJoin[Contexts1[],
ToString[x] <> "`"], ""]}]]; c = StringSplit[c, "\n \n"];
Mapp[ClearAttributes, {Rule, StringJoin}, Listable];
SetAttributes[x, b]; a = AppendTo[c, b];
If[SameQ[a[[1]], "Null"] && a[[2]] == {}, On[Part::partw];
{"Undefined", Attributes[x]}, If[SameQ[a[[1]], "Null"] &&
a[[2]] != {} && ! SystemQ[x], On[Part::partw]; {"Undefined",
Attributes[x]}, If[SameQ[a[[1]], "Null"] && a[[2]] != {} &&
a[[2]] != {}, On[Part::partw]; {"System", Attributes[x]},
On[Part::partw]; a]]]]]
In[50]:= a[x_] := x + 6; a[x_, y_] := Module[{}, x/y]; a[t_Integer] := 7
In[51]:= SetAttributes[a, {Protected, Listable}]; Definition2[a]
Out[51]= {"a[t_Integer] := 7", "a[x_] := x + 6",
"a[x_, y_] := Module[{}, x/y]", {Listable, Protected}}
The Definition2 call on system functions returns the nested
list, whose first element – "System", while the second element –
the list of attributes ascribed to a factual argument. On the user
function or procedure x the call Definition2[x] also returns the
nested list, whose first element – the optimized definitions of x
(in the sense of absence of contexts in them, at a series definitions in a
case of multiplicity of x definition), whereas the second element –
the list of attributes ascribed to x; in their absence the empty list
acts as the second element of the returned list. In a case of False
33
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
value on a test ascribed to a formal x argument, the procedure
call Definition2[x] will be returned unevaluated. Analogously
to the above procedures, the procedure Definition2 processes
the main both the erroneous, and especial situations.
Using the Definition2 procedure and the list representation,
we give an example of a simple enough Info procedure whose
call Info[x] in a convenient form returns the complete definition
of a symbol x, including its usage. While the call Info[x, y] with
the second optional y argument – an indefinite symbol – through
it additionally returns the usage for x symbol in string format.
The following fragment represents the source code of the Info
procedure with examples of its typical application.
In[3221]:= Info[x_ /; SymbolQ[x], y___] :=
If[! HowAct[x], $Failed, {If[StringQ[x::usage],
Print[If[{y} != {} && ! HowAct[y], y = x::usage, x::usage]],
Print["Usage on " <> ToString[x] <> " is absent"]],
ToExpression[Definition2[x][[1 ;; –2]]]; Definition[x]}[[–1]]]
In[3222]:= Info[StrStr]
The call StrStr[x] returns an expression x in string format if x is
different from string; otherwise, the double string obtained from an
expression x is returned.
Out[3222]= StrStr[x_] := If[StringQ[x], "\"" <> x <> "\"",
ToString[x]]
In[3223]:= x[x_] := x; x[x_, y_] := x*y; x[x_, y_, z_] := x*y*z
In[3224]:= Info[x]
Usage on x is absent
Out[3224]= x[x_] := x
x[x_, y_] := x*y
x[x_, y_, z_] := x*y*z
In[3225]:= Info[StrStr, g47]
The call StrStr[x] returns an expression x in string format if x is
different from string; otherwise, the double string obtained from an
expression x is returned.
Out[3225]= StrStr[x_] := If[StringQ[x], "\"" <> x <> "\"", ToString[x]]
In[3226]:= g47
Out[3226]= "The call StrStr[x] returns an expression x in string
format if x is different from string; otherwise, the double string
obtained from an expression x is returned."
34
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
In[3227]:= Info[agn]
Out[3227]= $Failed
If the first x argument – an indefined symbol, the procedure
call Info[x] returns $Failed.
Another moment should be mentioned. In some cases, the
above procedural objects can be represented in functional form
based on the list structures of the format:
F[x_, …, z_] := {Save[w, a, b, c, …]; Clear[a, b, c, …];
Procedure body, Get[w]; DeleteFile[w]}[[–2]]
The Save function saves all values of local and global procedure
variables in a certain w file, then clears all these variables, and
then executes the procedure body. Finally, Get function loads
the w file into the current session, restoring {a, b, c,...} variables,
and then deletes the w file. The result of the function call of the
type described is the second list element, beginning with its end
in a case if the procedure returns the result of the call through
the last sentence of its body, which is a fairly frequent case. We
can use {;|,} as the list element separators, depending on need.
Thus, on the basis of the above design it is possible to program
functional equivalents of quite complex procedures. An example
is the functional equivalent of the SubsDel procedure described
in section 3.4.
In[77]:= SubsDel[S_ /; StringQ[S], x_ /; StringQ[x], y_ /; ListQ[y] &&
AllTrue[Map[StringQ, y], TrueQ] &&
Plus[Sequences[Map[StringLength, y]]] == Length[y],
p_ /; MemberQ[{–1, 1}, p]] := {Save["#$#", {"b", "c", "d", "h", "k"}];
Clear[b, c, d, h, k]; {b, c = x, d, h = StringLength[S], k};
If[StringFreeQ[S, x], Return[S], b = StringPosition[S, x][[1]]];
For[k = If[p == 1, b[[2]] + 1, b[[1]] – 1], If[p == 1, k <= h, k >= 1],
If[p == 1, k++, k––], d = StringTake[S, {k, k}];
If[MemberQ[y, d] || If[p == 1, k == 1, k == h], Break[],
If[p == 1, c = c <> d, c = d <> c]; Continue[]]];
StringReplace[S, c –> ""], Get["#$#"]; DeleteFile["#$#"]}[[–2]]
In[78]:= SubsDel["12345avz6789", "avz", {"8", "5"}, 1]
Out[78]= "1234589"
A comparative analysis of both implementations confirms aforesaid.
35
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
It is well known [8-12,16], that the user package uploaded
into the current session can contains tools x whose definitions
obtained by means of the call Definition[x] aren't completely
optimized, i.e. contain constructions of the kind j <> "x`" where
j – a context from the system list $Packages. We have created a
number of tools [16] that solve various problems of processing
unoptimized definitions of both individual means and means
in the user packages located in files of {"m", "mx"} formats. So,
the call DefFunc1[x] provides return of the optimized definition
of an object x whose definition is located in the user package or
nb–document and that has been loaded into the current session.
At that, a name x should define an object without any attributes
and options or with attributes and/or options. Fragment below
represents source code of the DefFunc1 procedure along with an
example of its application.
In[7]:= Definition[ListListQ]
Out[7]= ListListQ[Global`ListListQ`L_] :=
If[ListQ[Global`ListListQ`L] && Global`ListListQ`L != {} &&
Length[Global`ListListQ`L] >= 1 &&
Length[Select[Global`ListListQ`L, ListQ[#1] &&
Length[#1] == Length[Global`ListListQ`L[[1]]] &]] ==
Length[Global`ListListQ`L], True, False]
In[8]:= DefFunc1[x_ /; SymbolQ[x] || StringQ[x]] :=
Module[{a = GenRules[Map14[StringJoin, {"Global`",
Context[x]}, ToString[x] <> "`"], ""], b = Definition2[x][[1]]},
ToExpression[Map[StringReplace[#, a] &, b]]; Definition[x]]
In[9]:= DefFunc1[ListListQ]
Out[9]= ListListQ[L_] := If[ListQ[L] && L != {} &&
Length[L] >= 1 && Length[Select[L, ListQ[#1] &&
Length[#1] == Length[L[[1]]] &]] == Length[L], True, False]
So, the procedure call DefFunc1[x] in an optimized format
returns the definition of an object x contained in a package or a
notebook loaded into the current session. The object name is set
in string format or symbol format depending on the object type
(procedure, function, global variable, procedure variable, etc.). Thus,
in the 2nd case the definition is essentially more readably, above
all, for rather large source codes of procedures, functions, along
36
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
with other objects. The TypesTools procedure is rather useful.
Calling TypesTools[x] procedure returns the three-element
list whose elements are sub-lists containing names in the string
format of tools with context x in the terms of the objects such as
Functions, Procedures, and Others, accordingly. During the
procedure run, lists of the form {n, "Name"} are intermediately
output, where n is the number of the tool being tested from the
tools list with context x, and Name is the name of the tool being
tested. The following fragment represents the source code of the
TypesTools procedure, followed by its application.
In[3325]:= TypesTools[x_ /; ContextQ[x]] := Module[{a = {},
b = {}, c = {}, d = CNames[x], t, j}, Monitor[j = 1;
While[j <= Length[d], Pause[0.1]; t = d[[j]]; If[QFunction[t],
AppendTo[a, t], If[ProcQ[t], AppendTo[b, t], AppendTo[c, t]]];
j++], {j, t}]; {a, b, c}]
In[3326]:= TypesTools["AladjevProcedures`"]
{1, "AcNb"}
==============
{1317, "$Version2"}
Out[3326]:= {{"AcNb", "ActBFM", …, "XOR1"},
{"ActCsProcFunc", …, "$SysContextsInM1"},
{"AddDelPosString", "Args", …, "$Version2"}}
Calling ContextMonitor[x] procedure during its execution
outputs the lists of the form {n, N, Tp, PI} where n is the number
of the tool being tested from the tools list with context x, N – is
the name of the tool being tested, Tp – its type {Function, Block,
Module, Other} and PI – a progress indicator; returning nothing.
The source code of the procedure is represented below.
ContextMonitor[x_/; ContextQ[x]] := Module[{c, d = CNames[x], t, j},
Monitor[c = 0; Map[{t = #, c++, j = TypeBFM[#], Pause[0.5]} &, d],
{c, t, If[! MemberQ[{"Block", "Function", "Module"}, j], "Other", j],
ProgressIndicator[c, {1, Length[d]}]}];]
TypesTools & ContextMonitor procedures use the Monitor
function whose call Monitor[x,y] generates a temporary monitor
place in which the continually updated current y value will be
displayed during the course of evaluation of x. Such approach
may be a rather useful in many rather important applications.
37
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
2.2. Headings of procedures in Mathematica software
Procedures in Mathematica system are formally presented
by Modules and Blocks whose program structure begins with a
Heading, i.e. heading – the header part of a procedure definition,
preceded to the sign {:= | =} of the delayed, as a rule, or instant
assignment. The components of the heading are the procedure
name and its formal arguments with patterns "_", possibly also
with testing functions assigned to them.
It is necessary to highlight that in Mathematica system as
correct procedural objects {Block, Module} only those objects are
considered which contain the patterns of the formal arguments
located in a certain order, namely:
1. The coherent group of formal arguments with patterns "_" has
to be located at the very beginning of the tuple of formal arguments in
headings of the above procedural objects;
2. Formal arguments with patterns "__" or "___" can to finish
the tuple of formal arguments; at that, couples of adjacent arguments
with patterns consisting from {"__", "___"} are inadmissible because
of possible violation of correctness (in context of scheduled computing
algorithm) of calls of the above procedural objects as a simple enough
fragment illustrates:
In[1221]:= A[x_, y__, z__] := x*y^2*z^3
In[1222]:= {A[x, y, z], A[x, y, h, z], A[x, y, h, x, a, b]}
Out[1222]= {x*y^2*z^3, h^z^3*x*y^2, h^x^a^b^3*x*y^2}
In[1223]:= G[x_, y__, z___] := x + y + z
In[1224]:= {G[x, y, z], G[x, y, m, n, z], G[x, y, z, h]}
Out[1224]= {x + y + z, m + n + x + y + z, h + x + y + z}
Other rather simple examples illustrate told. Thus, the real
correctness of tuple of formal arguments can be coordinated to
their arrangement in the tuple in context of patterns {“_”, “__”,
“___”}. At the same time, for all patterns for formal arguments
the testing Testx function of a rather complex kind can be used
as the following evident fragment illustrates:
In[1567]:= Sg[x_ /; StringQ[x], y__ /; If[Length[{y}] == 1,
38
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
IntegerQ[y], MemberQ3[{Integer, List, String},
Map[Head, {y}]]]] := {x, y}
In[1568]:= Sg["agn", 72, 77, "sv", {a, b}]
Out[1568]= {"agn", 72, 77, "sv", {a, b}}
In[1569]:= Sg1[x_ /; StringQ[x], y___ /; If[{y} == {}, True,
If[Length[{y}] == 1, IntegerQ[y], MemberQ3[{List, String,
Integer}, Map[Head, {y}]]]]] := {x, y}
In[1570]:= Sg1["agn", 72, 77, "sv", {a, b}, a + b]
Out[1570]= Sg1["agn", 72, 77, "sv", {a, b}, a + b]
Furthermore, a procedure and function headings in testing
functions are allowed to use procedure and function definitions
(using the list structure) that are activated in the current session
at the time the objects containing them are called, for example:
In[1620]:= M1[x_ /; {SetDelayed[h[a_], Module[{}, 42*a]],
h[x] < 2020}[[2]], y_] := Module[{a=5, b=7}, a*x^2 + b*y^2]
In[1621]:= M1[42, 47]
Out[1621]= 24283
In[1622]:= Definition[h]
Out[1622]= h[a_] := Module[{}, 42*a]
Right there once again it should be noted one an essential
moment. Definition of the testing Testx function can be directly
included to the procedure or function heading, becoming active
in the current session by the first procedure or function call:
In[2]:= P[x_, y_ /; {IntOddQ[t_] := IntegerQ[t] && OddQ[t],
IntOddQ[y]}[[–1]]] := x*y
In[3]:= P[72, 77]
Out[3]= 5544
In[4]:= Definition[IntOddQ]
Out[4]= IntOddQ[t_] := IntegerQ[t] && OddQ[t]
In[5]:= t = 77; Save["#", t]
In[6]:= P[x_ /; Module[{}, If[x^2 < Read["#"], Close["#"];
True, Close["#"]; False]], y_] := x*y
In[7]:= P[8, 7]
Out[7]= 56
39
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
Generally speaking, Mathematica's syntax and semantics,
when defining procedures (modules and blocks), allow the use of
procedure definitions in both the definition of test functions for
formal arguments and the definitions of local variables, as the
following fairly simple fragment illustrates quite clearly, while
for classical functions similar assumptions are only possible for
test functions, of cource.
In[9]:= Avz[x_ /; If[SetDelayed[g[t_], Module[{a = 42}, t^2 + a]];
g[x] < 777, True, False]] :=
Module[{a = SetDelayed[v[t_], Module[{b = 47, c = 67},
b*t^3 + c]]}, a = 77; a*v[x]]
In[10]:= Avz[7]
Out[10]= 1246476
In[11]:= Avz[100]
Out[11]= Avz[100]
In[12]:= Definition[g]
Out[12]= g[t_] := Module[{a = 42}, t^2 + a]
In[13]:= Definition[v]
Out[13]= v[t_] := Module[{b = 47, c = 67}, b*t^3 + c]
In[14]:= Context[g]
Out[14]= "AladjevProcedures`"
In[15]:= Context[v]
Out[15]= "Global`"
In[16]:= $Context
Out[16]= "Global`"
In[17]:= Contexts[]
Out[17]= {"AladjevProcedures`", "AladjevProcedures`BitGet1`",
"AladjevProcedures`CharacterQ`", …}
In[18]:= Length[%]
Out[18]= 1533
Procedures the definitions of which are contained in the test
functions or in the local variables domain are activated in the
current session when the procedure contains them is called. In
addition, the symbol v defined in the local area has the current
context, while the symbol g defined in the test function obtains
the context being the first in the list Contexts[] of all contexts of
the current session. The feasibility of using the above approach
to defining procedures is discussed in some detail in [8,11,15].
40
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
In a number of tasks, substantially including debugging of
the user software, there is a necessity of dynamic change of the
testing functions for formal arguments of blocks, functions and
modules in the moment of their call. The ChangeLc procedure
allowing dynamically to monitor influence of testing functions
of formal arguments of tools for correctness of their calls is for
this purpose programmed. The following fragment submits the
source code of the procedure with examples of its application.
In[4478]:= ChangeLc[x_ /; StringQ[x] || ListQ[x],
P_ /; BlockFuncModQ[P], y___] :=
Module[{a = ArgsBFM2[P], b = Definition1[P],
p, c, d, g, n, m = Flatten[{x}], t = ToString[P]},
p = Map[StringTake[#, Flatten[StringPosition[#, "_"]][[1]]] &, m];
b = StringReplace[b, "Global`" <> t <> "`" –> ""];
c = StringReplace[b, t <> "[" –> ToString[n] <> "[", 1];
a = Select[a, SuffPref[#, p, 1] &];
If[a == {}, P @@ {y},
c = StringReplace[c, Rule1[Riffle[a, m]], 1];
ToExpression[c]; t = n @@ {y};
{If[SuffPref[ToString1[t], ToString[n] <> "[", 1],
"Updating testing functions for formal arguments of " <>
ToString[P] <> " is unsuitable", t], Remove[n]}[[1]]]]
In[4479]:= G[x_, y_, z_Integer] := x^2 + y^2 + z^2
In[4480]:= ChangeLc["y_ /;IntegerQ[y]", G, 42, 47, 67]
Out[4480]= 8462
In[4481]:= ChangeLc["y_ /;RationalQ[y]", G, 42, 47, 67]
Out[4481]= "Updating testing functions for formal
arguments of G is unsuitable"
In[4482]:= ChangeLc["y_ /;RationalQ[y]", G, 42, 47/72, 67]
Out[4482]= 32417761/5184
The procedure call ChangeLc[x, P, y] returns the result of a
call P[y] on condition of replacement of the testing functions of
arguments of a block, module or function P by the new functions
determined by a string equivalent x or by their list. The string
equivalent is coded in shape "x_ /; TestQ[x]", x – an argument.
41
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
The task of checking formal arguments of blocks, modules,
functions for their validity to admissible values plays a rather
important role and this problem is solved by means of the test
functions assigned to the corresponding formal arguments of
the above objects. The first part of the next fragment represents
an example of how to organize a system to test the actual values
obtained when the Art procedure is called. At that, if the formal
arguments receive invalid actual values, then procedure call is
returned unevaluated with the corresponding message printing
for the first of such formal arguments. Note that built-in means
Mathematica also do quite so. Meantime, the task of checking
all invalid values for formal arguments when calling the above
objects is more relevant. Below is a possible approach to that.
In[2185]:= Art[x_ /; If[IntegerQ[x], True,
Print["Argument x is not integer, but received: x = " <>
ToString1[x]]; False],
y_ /; If[ListQ[y], True,
Print["Argument y is not a list, but received: y = " <>
ToString1[y]]; False],
z_ /; If[StringQ[z], True,
Print["Argument z is not a string, but received: z = " <>
ToString1[z]]; False]] :=
Module[{a = 77}, N[x*(Length[y] + StringLength[z])/a]]
In[2186]:= Art[47, {a, b, c}, "RansIan"]
Out[2186]= 6.1039
In[2187]:= Art[47.42, 67, "abc"]
Argument x is not integer, but received: x = 47.42
Out[2187]= Art[47.42, 67, "abc"]
In[2188]:= Art[47.42, 67, "abc"]
Argument x is not integer, but received: x = 47.42
Out[2188]= Art[47.42, 67, "abc"]
In[2189]:= Art[500, 67, "abc"]
Argument y is not a list, but received: y = 67
Out[2189]= Art[500, 67, "abc"]
In[2190]:= Art[500, {a, b, c}, 77]
Argument z is not a string, but received: z = 77
Out[2190]= Art[500, {a, b, c}, 77]
42
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
The above approach is based on the following construction:
G[x_ /; If[Testx, $x$ = True, Print[…]; $x$ = False; True],
y_ /; If[Testy, $y$ = True, Print[…]; $y$ = False; True], ……
h_ /; AllTrue[{$x$, $y$, …}, # == True &]] := Module[{}, …]
The Kr procedure is an example of using of the above approach.
In[2192]:= Kr[x_ /; If[IntegerQ[x], $x$ = True,
Print["Argument x is not integer, but received: x = " <>
ToString1[x]]; $x$ = False; True],
y_ /; If[ListQ[y], $y$ = True,
Print["Argument y is not a list, but received: y = " <>
ToString1[y]]; $y$ = False; True],
z_ /; If[StringQ[z], $z$ = True,
Print["Argument z is not a string, but received: z = " <>
ToString1[z]]; $z$ = False; True],
h_ /; AllTrue[{$x$, $y$, $z$}, # == True &]] :=
Module[{a = 77}, N[x*(Length[y] + StringLength[z])/a]]
In[2193]:= Kr[47, {a, b, c}, "RansIan", 78]
Out[2193]= 6.1039
In[2194]:= Kr[42.47, 67, "abc", 78]
Argument x is not integer, but received: x = 42.47
Argument y is not a list, but received: y = 67
Out[2194]= Kr[42.47, 67, "abc", agn]
In[2195]:= Kr[42.47, 67, 90, 78]
Argument x is not integer, but received: x = 42.47
Argument y is not a list, but received: y = 67
Argument z is not a string, but received: z = 90
Out[2195]= Kr[42.47, 67, 90, agn]
The final part of the above fragment represents the Kr procedure
equipped with a system for testing the values of the actual arguments
passed to the formal arguments when the procedure is called. At that,
only three {x, y, z} arguments are used as the formal arguments used
by the procedure body, whereas the 4th additional argument h, when
the procedure is called obtains an arbitrary expression, and in the Kr
body is not used. Argument h at the procedure header level tests the
validity of the actual values obtained by formal arguments when the
procedure is called. The argument allows to obtain information on all
inadmissible values for formal arguments at the procedure call. The
fragment is fairly transparent and does not require any clarifyings.
43
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
Based on the form of the heading shown above, it is possible
to represent its rather useful extension, that allows to form the
function body at the level of such heading. In general, the format
of such header takes the following form:
G[x_ /; If[Test[x], Save["#", a, b, c, …]; a = {x, True}; True,
Save["#", a, b, c, …]; Print["Argument x is not integer, but received:
x = " <> ToString1[x]]; a = {x, False}; True],
y_ /; If[Test[y], b = {y, True}; True,
Print["Argument y is not integer, but received:
y = " <> ToString1[y]]; b = {y, False}; True],
z_ /; If[Test[z], c = {z, True}; True,
Print["Argument z is not integer, but received:
z = " <> ToString1[z]]; c = {z, False}; True], ……
…………………………………………………………………………
h_ /; If[AllTrue[{a[[2]],b[[2]], c[[2]]}, # == True &],
Result = Function_Body[a[[1]], b[[1]], c[[1]]]; Get["#"];
DeleteFile["#"]; True, Get["#"]; DeleteFile["#"]; False]] := Result
where Test[g] – a testing expression, testing an expression g on
admissibility to be g as a valid value for the g argument and Result is
the result of Function_body evaluation on formal arguments {x,y,z,…}.
Let give a concrete filling of the above structural form as an example:
In[3338]:= ArtKr[x_ /; If[IntegerQ[x], Save["#", a, b, c];
a = {x, True}; True, Save["#", a, b, c];
Print["Argument x is not Integer, but received:
x = " <> ToString1[x]]; a = {x, False}; True],
y_ /; If[RealQ[y], b = {y, True}; True,
Print["Argument y is not Real, but received:
y = " <> ToString1[y]]; b = {y, False}; True],
z_ /; If[RationalQ[z], c = {z, True}; True,
Print["Argument z is not Rational, but received:
z = " <> ToString1[z]]; c = {z, False}; True],
h_ /; If[AllTrue[{a[[2]], b[[2]], c[[2]]}, # == True &],
$Result$ = N[a[[1]]*b[[1]]*c[[1]]]; Get["#"]; DeleteFile["#"]; True,
Get["#"]; DeleteFile["#"]; False]] := $Result$
In[3339]:= $Result$ = ArtKr[72, 77.8, 50/9, vsv]
Out[3339]= 31120.
44
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
In[3340]:= $Result$ =ArtKr[72, 77.8, 78, vsv]
Argument z is not Rational, but received: z = 78
Out[3340]= ArtKr[72, 77.8, 78, vsv]
In[3341]:= ArtKr[72, 778, 78, vsv]
Argument y is not Real, but received: y = 778
Argument z is not Rational, but received: z = 78
Out[3341]= ArtKr[72, 778, 78, vsv]
In[3342]:= ArtKr[7.2, 77.8, 78, vsv]
Argument x is not Integer, but received: x = 7.2
Argument z is not Rational, but received: z = 78
Out[3342]= ArtKr[7.2, 77.8, 78, vsv]
In[3343]:= ArtKr[7.2, 900, 50, vsv]
Argument x is not Integer, but received: x = 7.2
Argument y is not Real, but received: y = 900
Argument z is not Rational, but received: z = 50
Out[3343]= ArtKr[7.2, 900, 50, vsv]
The function call ArtKr[x, y, z, h] returns the result of evaluation
of a Function_Body on actual arguments {x, y, z}. In addition, the
call ArtKr[x, y, z, h] as a value for formal h argument obtains an
arbitrary expression. Through the global variable $Result$, the
call ArtKr[x, y, z, h] additionally returns the same value. At that,
the above structural form is based on the processing principle
of actual arguments passed to an object (block, function, module),
namely – the values of actual arguments are processed by the
corresponding testing functions from left to right until the first
calculation False that is obtained by a testing function, after that
the call of the object is returned as unevaluated, otherwise the
result of the object calculation is returned.
Therefore, the test functions for the leading formal arguments
of the form are formed in such way that they return True when
fixing the real value of the test functions and the values passed
to them. Whereas the test function for the auxiliary argument h
determines both the evaluation of the object body and validity
of the factual values for the principal arguments {x, y, z}, solving
the task of returning the result of the calculation of the body of
the object or returns the result of the call unevaluated. Fragment
above is fairly transparent and does not require any clarifyings.
45
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
According to the scheme described above, Mathematica allows
a number of useful modifications. In particular, the following
form of organizing headers {block, function, module} having the
following format may well be of interest:
S[x_ /; {X1; …; Xp; {Testx|True}}[[1]],
y_ /; {Y1; … ; Yn; Testy}[[1]],
………………………………………………………..
z___ /; {Z1; …; Zt; Testz}[[1]] := Object
In addition as {X1,…,Xp; Y1,…,Yn; ...; Z1,…,Zt} act admissible
offers of the Mathematica language, including calls of blocks,
functions and modules whereas as {Testx,Testy,…,Testz} act the
testing functions ascribed to the corresponding formal {x,y,…,z}
arguments. In a case if there is no the test function for a formal
argument (i.e. argument allows any type of actual value) instead of
it is used True. Moreover, the test function for pattern "x___" or
"x__" should refer to all formal arguments relating thereto. In a
case of such patterns used in an object header should be used
or True, or a special test function, for example, that is presented
below. In a number of cases similar approach can be interesting
enough. The procedure call TrueListQ[x, y] returns True if a list x
has elements whose types match to the corresponding elements
of a list y, otherwise False is returned. If lengths of both lists are
different, then the first Min[x, y] their elements are analyzed. At
that, the call with the third argument z – an undefinite symbol –
additionally returns the list of elements positions of list x whose
types different from the corresponding types from the y list. The
source code of the procedure are represented below.
In[942]:= TrueListQ[x_ /; ListQ[x], y_ /; ListQ[y], z___] :=
Module[{a = Length[x], b = Length[y], c = {}, t = {}},
Do[If[SameQ[Head[x[[j]]], y[[j]]], AppendTo[c, True],
AppendTo[t, j]; AppendTo[c, False]], {j, Min[a, b]}];
If[{z} != {} && SymbolQ[z], z = t; If[t == {}, True, False],
If[t == {}, True, False]]]
In[943]:= TrueListQ[{77, 6, "abc"}, {Integer, Symbol, String}]
Out[943]= False
46
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
In[944]:= TrueListQ[{77, 7.8, "a"}, {Integer, Real, String}]
Out[944]= True
In[945]:= {TrueListQ[{a, 78, "2020"}, {Integer, Real, String}, g], g}
Out[945]= {False, {1, 2}}
The following simple GW procedure uses the TrueListQ in
heading for definition of its optional formal y argument along
with illustrative examples of the procedure calls.
In[63]:= GW[x_, y___ /; TrueListQ[{y}, {Integer, Real, Rational},
agn]] := Module[{a = 78}, x*(y + a)]
In[64]:= GW[77]
Out[64]= 6006
In[65]:= GW[77, 78, 7.8, 7/8]
Out[65]= 12680.
In[66]:= {GW[77, 78, 42, 47], agn}
Out[66]= {GW[77, 78, 42, 47], {2, 3}}
As an instructive information, an example of a procedure
whose heading is based on the principles mentioned above is
presented. The procedure call Mn[x, y, z] returns the list of all
arguments passed to the procedure without reference to them.
In[3349]:= Mn[x_ /; {WriteLine["#", x]; IntegerQ[x]}[[1]],
y_ /; {WriteLine["#", y]; ListQ[y]}[[1]],
z___ /; {WriteLine["#", z]; True}[[1]]] :=
Module[{Arg}, Close["#"]; Arg = ReadString["#"]; DeleteFile["#"];
Arg = StringReplace[Arg, "\n" –> ","];
Arg = StringTake[Arg, {1, –2}];
Arg = ToExpression[StringToList[Arg]]; Arg]
In[3350]:= Mn[77, {42, 47, 67}]
Out[3350]= {77, {42, 47, 67}}
In[3351]:= Mn[77, {42, 47, 67}, a + b]
Out[3351]= {77, {42, 47, 67}, a + b}
In[3352]:= Mn[m, {42, 47, 67}, a + b]
Out[3352]= Mn[m, {42, 47, 67}, a + b]
In[3353]:= Mn[m, {42, 47, 67}, a + b, 77, 78]
Out[3353]= Mn[m, {42, 47, 67}, a + b, 77, 78]
Another point should be emphasized. As already mentioned,
when calling an object (block, function or module), the factual
arguments passed to it in its heading are processed in the list
47
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
order, i.e., from left to right in the list of formal arguments. In
this regard, and in view of the foregoing, there is a rather real
possibility of setting in definition of some formal argument of a
test function, that can be used as test functions for subsequent
formal arguments of the object heading. The following fragment
represents a rather simple Av function whose heading contains
definitions of two Boolean functions, used by a testing function
for the last formal z argument of the Av function. At the same
time, when you call function Av, both Boolean functions B and
V become active in the current session, as it is well shown in the
examples below.
In[3442]:= Av[x_ /; {SetDelayed[B[t_], If[t <= 90, True, False]];
NumberQ[x]}[[1]],
y_ /; {SetDelayed[V[t_], ! RealQ[t]]; RealQ[y]}[[1]],
z_ /; B[z] && V[z]||RationalQ[z]] := N[Sqrt[x*y/z]]
In[3443]:= {Av[77, 7.8`, 42/47], Av[77, 90, 500]}
Out[3443]= {25.9249, Av[77, 90, 500]}
In[3444]:= Definition[B]
Out[3444]= B[t_] := If[t <= 90, True, False]
In[3445]:= Definition[V]
Out[3445]= V[t_] := ! RealQ[t]
In[3446]:= {B[42], V[47]}
Out[3446]= {True, True}
In[3447]:= Ag[x_ /; {SetDelayed[W[t_], Module[{a = 77}, a*t^2]];
IntegerQ[x]}[[1]]] := W[x] + x^2
In[3448]:= {Ag[42], W[42]}
Out[3448]= {137592, 135828}
In[3449]:= Definition[W]
Out[3449]= W[t_] := Module[{a = 77}, a*t^2]
Thus, in particular, the last example of the previous fragment
also shows that the object W (block, function, module) defined in
the header of another Ag object allows a correct call in the body
of the Ag object yet when it is first called. When Ag is called, W
becomes active in the current session. The above fragments are
quite transparent and do not require any clarifyings. Technique
presented in them are of some practical interest in programming
of the objects headings and objects as a whole.
48
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
On the assumption of the general definition of a procedure,
in particular, of modular type
M[x_ /; Testx, y_ /; Testy, ...] := Module[{Locals}, Procedure body]
and of the fact that concrete definition of procedure is identified
not by its name, but its heading we will consider a set of useful
enough tools [16] that provide the various manipulations with
the headings of procedures and functions and play a important
part in the procedural and functional programming and, above
all, of programming of problems of the system character.
Having defined such object useful in many appendices as
the heading of a procedure or function in the form "Name[List of
formal arguments with the testing tools ascribed to them]", naturally
arises the question of creating of means for testing of the objects
regarding their relation to the `Heading` type. We have created
a number of tools [15,16] in the form of procedures HeadingQ ÷
HeadingQ3. At the same time, between pairs of the procedures
{HeadingQ, HeadingQ1} and {HeadingQ2, HeadingQ3} principal
distinctions exist. Meantime, considering standard along with
some other unlikely encoding formats of the procedures and
functions headings, the above four tools can be considered as
rather useful testing tools in programming. In addition, from
experience of their use and their time characteristics it became
clear that it is quite enough to be limited oneself only by tools
HeadingQ and HeadingQ1 which cover a rather wide range of
erroneous coding of headings. Meantime, taking into account
the mechanism of expressions parse for their correctness, that
Mathematica uses, creation of comprehensive means of testing
of the headings is a rather difficult. Naturally, it is possible to
use the non–standard receptions for receiving the testing tools
for the headings having a rather wide set of the deviations from
the standard ones, but such outlay often do not pay off by the
received benefits.
In particular, the possibilities of the HeadingQ ÷ HeadingQ3
procedures are overlaped by opportunities of the means whose
call TestHeadingQ returns True, if a x represents the heading in
49
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
string format of a block, module, function, and False otherwise.
Whereas the procedure call TestHeadingQ[x, y] with the second
optional y argument – an indefinite variable – thru it additionally
returns information specifying the reasons of the incorrectness
of a heading x. At that, on x objects of the same name (multiple
objects) the procedure call returns $Failed; the extension of the
procedure to case of the multiple objects does not cause much
difficulty. The source code of the TestHeadingQ procedure and
the comparative analysis of its use concerning the HeadingQ ÷
HeadingQ3 tools say about its preference at programming in
Mathematica [8,9,15]. So, of the detailed analysis follows, that
the TestHeadingQ procedure on the opportunities surpasses the
above testing tools of the same purpose.
In the light of real correctness of formal arguments that has
been defined above and is caused by mutual arrangements of
formal arguments in the context of patterns {"_", "__", "___"}
we can significantly generalize the above group of procedures
HeadingQ ÷ HeadingQ3, intended for testing of correctness of
headings of the user blocks, functions & modules, additionally
using the CorrTupleArgs procedure. For this purpose the tool
HeadingsUQ can be used.
Calling the HeadingsUQ[x] procedure returns True if all
components composing an object x in the context of the call
Definition[x] have correct headings, and False otherwise. While
the call HeadingsUQ[x, y] in addition through the 2nd optional
argument – an indefined y symbol – returns the list the elements
of which are True if the heading of the appropriate component
of x object is correct, or the list whose first element determines
incorrect heading of a component of the x object, whereas the
second element determines of the component number with this
heading concerning the call Definition[x]. The source code of the
TestHeadingQ procedure with examples of its use can be found
in [15,16]. The HeadingsUQ procedure rather exhaustively tests
the correctness of the headings of blocks, functions and modules.
It is appropriate to make one quite substantial remark here.
As you know, Mathematica does not allow to use the testing
50
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
functions in block, function, and module headers that will use
factual argument values that relate to other formal arguments
as the following simple fragment rather visually illustrates.
In[7]:= V[x_ /; IntegerQ[x], y_ /; EvenQ[x] && IntegerQ[y]] := x/y
In[8]:= V[42, 77]
Out[8]= V[42, 77]
In the example shown, the testing function assigned to the
second formal argument y cannot include the value passed to
the first formal argument x, otherwise by causing the return of
V function call unevaluated. We will offer here one interesting
reception, allowing to solve similar and some other problems.
Consider it with a rather simple example.
In[2296]:= V[x_ /; {Save3["j", x], IntegerQ[x]}[[–1]],
y_ /; {If[Get["j"]*y > 100, True, False], DeleteFile["j"]}[[1]]] := x*y
In[2297]:= V[42, 77]
Out[2297]= 3234
In[2298]:= V[7, 8]
Out[2298]= V[7, 8]
In order to pass an actual value (passed to the x argument
when the V function is called) to a testing function of another y
argumenе, by the function Save3 the value is stored in a сertain
temporary j file. Then call Get[j] allows to read the stored value
from the file j in the required point of the testing function of any
formal argument of the header, after necessity deleting file j. To
solve such problems, a Save3 function is of interest – a version
of the built-in Save function whose Save3[f, x] call saves in the f
of the txt–format an expression x without returning anything.
In[2310]:= Save3[f_, x_] := {Write[f, x], Close[f]}[[1]]
In[2311]:= Save3["###", b*S + c*V + G*x]
In[2312]:= Get["##"]
Out[2312]= b*S + c*V + G*x
After calling Save3[f, x], the file with expression x remains
closed and is loaded into the current session by function Get[f],
returning the x value. Note that the Write function used by the
Save3 has a number of features discussed in detail in [8]. In the
first place, this refers to preserving the sequence of expressions.
51
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
The following procedure serves as an useful enough tool at
manipulating with functions and procedures, its call HeadPF[x]
returns heading in string format of a block, module or function
with a x name activated in the current session, i.e. the function
in its traditional understanding with heading. Whereas on other
values of the x argument the call is returned unevaluated. At
the same time, the problem of definition of headings is actual
also in a case of the objects of the above type of the same name
which have more than one heading. In this case the procedure
call HeadPF[w] returns the list of headings in string format of
the subobjects composing a w object as a whole. The following
fragment represents the source code of the HeadPF procedure
along with a typical example of its application.
In[2225]:= M[x_ /; x == "avzagn"] := Module[{a}, a*x];
M[x_, y_, z_] := x*y*z; M[x_String] := x;
M[x_ /; IntegerQ[x], y_String] := Module[{a, b, c}, x];
M[x_, y_] := Module[{a, b, c}, "abc"; x + y]
In[2226]:= HeadPF[x_ /; BlockFuncModQ[x]] := Module[{b,
c = ToString[x], a = Select[Flatten[{PureDefinition[x]}],
! SuffPref[#, "Default[", 1] &]}, b = Map[StringTake[#,
{1, Flatten[StringPosition[#, {" := ", " = "}]][[1]] – 1}] &, a];
If[Length[b] == 1, b[[1]], b]]
In[2227]:= HeadPF[M]
Out[2227]= {"M[x_ /; x == \"avzagn\"]", "M[x_, y_, z_]",
"M[x_ /; IntegerQ[x], y_String]", "M[x_String]", "M[x_, y_]"}
Here, it is necessary to make one essential enough remark
concerning the means dealing with the headings of procedures
and functions. The matter is that as it was shown earlier, the
testing tools ascribed to the formal arguments, as a rule, consist
of the earlier defined testing functions or the reserved keywords
defining the type, for example, Integer. While as a side effect the
built–in Math–language allows to use the constructions that can
contain definitions of the testing tools, directly in the headings
of procedures and functions. Certain interesting examples of
that have been represented above. Meanwhile, despite of such
opportunity, the programmed means are oriented, as a rule, on
52
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
use for testing of admissibility of the factual arguments or the
predefined means, or including the testing algorithms in the
body of the procedures and functions. For this reason, HeadPF
procedure presented above in such cases can return incorrect
results. Whereas the HeadPFU procedure covers such peculiar
cases. The procedure call HeadPFU[x] correctly returns the
heading in string format of a block, module or function with a
name x activated in the current session regardless of a way of
definition of testing of factual arguments. The fragment below
presents the source code of the HeadPFU procedure along with
typical examples of its application.
In[2230]:= P[x_, y_ /; {IntOddQ[t_] := IntegerQ[t] && OddQ[t],
IntOddQ[y]}[[–1]]] := x*y
In[2231]:= HeadPF[P]
Out[2231]= "P[x_, y_ /; {IntOddQ[t_]"
In[2232]:= HeadPFU[x_ /; BlockFuncModQ[x]] :=
Module[{a = Flatten[{PureDefinition[x]}], b = {}, c, g},
Do[c = Map[#[[1]] – 1 &, StringPosition[a[[j]], " := "]];
Do[If[SyntaxQ[Set[g, StringTake[a[[j]], {1, c[[k]]}]]],
AppendTo[b, g]; Break[], Null], {k, Length[c]}], {j, Length[a]}];
If[Length[b] == 1, b[[1]], b]]
In[2233]:= HeadPFU[P]
Out[2233]= "P[x_, y_ /; {IntOddQ[t_] := IntegerQ[t] && OddQ[t],
IntOddQ[y]}[[–1]]]"
In[2234]:= V[x_ /; {Save3["#", x], IntegerQ[x]}[[–1]],
y_ /; {If[Get["#"]*y > 77, True, False], DeleteFile["#"]}[[1]]] := x*y
In[2235]:= HeadPFU[V]
Out[2235]= "V[x_ /; {Save3[\"#\", x], IntegerQ[x]}[[–1]],
y_ /; {If[Get[\"#\"]*y > 77, True, False], DeleteFile[\"#\"]}[[1]]]"
In this regard the testing of a x object regarding to be of the
same name is enough actually; the QmultiplePF procedure [16]
solves the problem whose call QmultiplePF[x] returns True, if x
is an object of the same name (Function, Block, Module), and False
otherwise. Whereas the procedure call QmultiplePF[x, y] with
the second optional y argument – an indefinite variable – through
y returns the list of definitions of all subobjects with a name x.
Right there pertinently to note some more tools linked with
53
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
the HeadPF procedure. So, the Headings procedure is a rather
useful expansion of the HeadPF procedure in a case of blocks,
functions and modules of the same name but with the different
headings. Generally, the call Headings[x] returns the nested list
whose elements are the sublists which determine respectively
headings of subobjects composing an object x; the first elements
of such sublists defines the types of subobjects, whereas others
define the headings corresponding to them. In a number of the
appendices that widely use procedural programming, a rather
useful is the HeadingsPF procedure that is an expansion of the
previous procedure. Generally, the call HeadingsPF[] returns
the nested list, whose elements are sublists that respectively
define the headings of functions, blocks and modules, whose
definitions have been evaluated in the current session; the first
element of each such sublist determines an object type in the
context {"Block", "Module", "Function"} while the others define
the headings corresponding to it. The procedure call returns a
simple list if any of sublists does not contain headings; at that,
if in the current session the evaluations of definitions of objects
of the specified three types weren't made, the call returns empty
list. The call with any arguments is returned unevaluated. The
following fragment represents source code of the HeadingsPF
procedure along with an example of its typical application.
In[2310]:= HeadingsPF[x___ /; SameQ[x, {}]] := Module[{a = {},
d = {}, k = 1, b, c = {{"Block"}, {"Function"}, {"Module"}}, t},
Map[If[Quiet[Check[BlockFuncModQ[#], False]],
AppendTo[a, #], Null] &, Names["`*"]];
b = Map[Headings[#] &, a]; While[k <= Length[b], t = b[[k]];
If[NestListQ[t], d = Join[d, t], AppendTo[d, t]]; k++];
Map[If[#[[1]] == "Block", c[[1]] = Join[c[[1]], #[[2 ;; –1]]],
If[#[[1]] == "Function", c[[2]] = Join[c[[2]], #[[2 ;; –1]]],
c[[3]] = Join[c[[3]], #[[2 ;; –1]]]]] &, d];
c = Select[c, Length[#] > 1 &]; If[Length[c] == 1, c[[1]], c]]
In[2311]:= M[x_ /; SameQ[x, "avz"], y_] := Module[{a, b, c}, y];
L1[x_] := x; M[x_, y_, z_] := x + y + z; L[x_, y_] := x + y;
M[x_ /; x == "avz"] := Module[{a, b, c}, x];
M[x_ /; IntegerQ[x], y_String] := Module[{a, b, c}, x];
54
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
M[x_, y_] := Module[{a, b, c}, "agn"; x + y]; M[x_String] := x;
M[x_ /; ListQ[x], y_] := Block[{a, b, c}, "agn"; Length[x] + y];
F[x_ /; SameQ[x, "avz"], y_] := {x, y}; F[x_ /; x == "avz"] := x
In[2312]:= HeadingsPF[]
Out[2312]= {{"Block", "M[x_ /; ListQ[x], y_]"},
{"Function", "F[x_ /; x === \"avz\", y_]", "F[x_ /; x == \"avz\"]",
"L[x_, y_]", "L1[x_]", "M[x_, y_, z_]", "M[x_String]"},
{"Module", "M[x_ /; x === \"avz\", y_]", "M[x_, y_]",
"M[x_ /; x == \"avz\"]", "M[x_ /; IntegerQ[x], y_String]"}}
In the light of possibility of existence in the current session
of procedures and functions of the same name with different
headings the problem of removal from the session of an object
with the concrete heading is of a certain interest; this problem
is solved by the procedure RemProcOnHead, whose the source
code with an example of its application is represented below.
In[7]:= RemProcOnHead[x_ /; HeadingQ[x]||HeadingQ1[x]||
ListQ[x] && AllTrue[Map[HeadingQ[#] &, x], TrueQ]] :=
Module[{b, c, d, p, a = HeadName[If[ListQ[x], x[[1]], x]]},
If[! MemberQ[Names["`*"] || ! HowAct[a], a], $Failed,
b = Definition2[a]; c = b[[1 ;; –2]]; d = b[[–1]];
ToExpression["ClearAttributes["<>a<> ","<>ToString[d]<>"]"];
y = Map[StandHead, Flatten[{x}]];
p = Select[c, ! SuffPref[#, x, 1] &];
ToExpression["Clear[" <> a <> "]"];
If[p == {}, "Done", ToExpression[p];
ToExpression["SetAttributes["<>a <> "," <> ToString[d] <> "]"];
"Done"]]]
In[8]:= V[x_] := Module[{}, x^6]; V[x_Integer] := x^2
In[9]:= {RemProcOnHead["V[x_Integer]"],
RemProcOnHead["V[x_]"]}
Out[9]= {"Done", "Done"}
In[10]:= Definition[V]
Out[10]= Null
The call RemProcOnHead[x] returns "Done" with removing from
the current session a procedure, function or their list with heading or
with list of x headings that are given in string format; headings in call
RemProcOnHead[x] is coded according to the format ToString1[x].
55
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
The task, closely adjacent to the headings, is to determine
the arity of objects. For this purpose, we have created a number
of means [8,9]. In particular, the ArityBFM1 procedure defining
arity of objects of the type {module, classical function, block} serves
as quite useful addition to the procedure Arity and some others.
The procedure call ArityBFM1[x] returns the arity (number
of the formal arguments) of a block, function or module x in the
format of 4–element list whose the 1st, the 2nd, the 3rd elements
define quantity of formal arguments with the patterns "_", "__"
and "___" accordingly. While the 4th element defines common
quantity of formal arguments which can be different from the
quantity of actual arguments. In addition, the x heading should
has classical type, i.e. it should not include non–standard, but
acceptable methods of headings definition. The unsuccessful
procedure call returns $Failed.
The following procedure serves for definition of arity of system
functions. The procedure call AritySystemFunction[x] returns the 2–
element list whose 1st element defines number of formal arguments,
while the second element – quantity of admissible actual arguments.
The call with the second optional y argument – an indefinite variable –
thru it returns the generalized template of formal arguments.
In[3341]:= AritySystemFunction[x_, y___] := Module[{a, b, c, d, g, p},
If[! SysFunctionQ[x], $Failed, a = SyntaxInformation[x];
If[a == {}, $Failed, c = {0, 0, 0, 0}; b = Map[ToString, a[[1]][[2]]];
b = Map[If[SuffPref[#, "{", 1], "_",
If[SuffPref[#, {"Optional", "OptionsPattern"}, 1], "_.", #]] &, b];
If[{y} != {} && ! HowAct[y],
y = Map[ToExpression[ToString[Unique["x"]] <> #] &, b], 77];
Map[If[# == "_", c[[1]]++, If[# == "_.", c[[2]]++,
If[# == "__", c[[3]]++, c[[4]]++]]] &, b]; {p, c, d, g} = c;
d = DeleteDuplicates[{p + d, If[d != 0||g != 0, Infinity, p + c]}];
If[d != {0, Infinity}, d, Quiet[x[Null]]; If[Set[p, Messages[x]] == {}, d,
p = Select[Map[ToString, Map[Part[#, 2] &, p]],
! StringFreeQ[#, " expected"] &]; p = Map[StringTake[#,
{Flatten[StringPosition[#, ";"]][[1]] + 1, –2}] &, p];
p = ToExpression[Flatten[StringCases[p, DigitCharacter ..]]];
If[p == {}, {1}, If[Length[p] > 1, {Min[p], Max[p]}, p]]]]]]]
In[3342]:= {AritySystemFunction[If, g72], g72}
Out[3342]= {{2, 4}, {x16_, x17_, x18_., x19_.}}
56
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
2.3. Optional arguments of procedures and functions
When programming procedures and functions often there
is an expediency to define some of their formal arguments as
optional. In addition, in case of explicit lack of such arguments
by a call of tools, they receive values by default. System built–in
Mathematica functions use two basic methods for dealing with
optional arguments that are suitable for the user tools too. The
first method consists in that that a value of each argument x that
is coded by pattern "_:" in the form x_:b should be replaced by
b, if the argument omitted. Almost all built–in system functions
that use this method, omit arguments since the end of the list of
formal arguments. So, simple function G[x_: 5, y_: 7] := {x, y} two
optional arguments have, for which values by default – 5 and 7
respectively. As Mathematica system assumes that arguments
are omitted since end of the list of formal arguments then we
have not a possibility by positionally (in general selectively) do an
argument as optional.
In[3376]:= G[x_: 5, y_: 6] := {x, y}
In[3377]:= {G[], G[42, 77], G[42]}
Out[3377]= {{5, 6}, {42, 77}, {42, 6}}
So, from a simple example follows that for function G from
two optional arguments the call G[42] refers value by default to
the second argument, but not to the first. Therefore this method
has a rather limited field of application.
The second method of organization of optional arguments
consists in use of explicit names for the optional arguments by
allowing to give them values using transformation rules. This
method is particularly convenient for means like Plot function
which have a rather large number of optional arguments, only
a few of which usually need to be set in a particular example.
The typical method is that values for so–called named optional
arguments can be specified by including the appropriate rules
at the end of the arguments at a function call. At determining of
the named optional arguments for a procedure or function g, it
is conventional to store the default values for these arguments
57
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
as a list of transformation rules assigned to Options[g]. So, as a
typical example of definition for a tool with zero or more named
optional arguments can be:
g[x_, y_, OptionsPattern[]] := Module[{}, x*y]
Then for this means a list of transformation rules assigned
to Options[g] is determined
Options[g] = {val1 –> a, val2 –> b}
Whereas expression OptionValue[w] for a named optional
argument w has to be included to the body of the tool, in order
that this mechanism worked. Below is presented the definition
of a function g that allows up to 2 named optional arguments:
In[2114]:= g[x_, y_, OptionsPattern[]] :=
(OptionValue[val1]*x + OptionValue[val2]*y)/
(OptionValue[val1]*OptionValue[val2])
In[2115]:= Options[g] = {val1 –> 42, val2 –> 47}
Out[2115]= {val1 –> 42, val2 –> 47}
In[2116]:= g[90, 500]
Out[2116]= 13640/987
In[2117]:= g[90, 500, val1 –> 77]
Out[2117]= 30430/3619
In[2118]:= g[90, 500, val1 –> 10, val2 –> 100]
Out[2118]= 509/10
From the represented example the second method of work
with named optional arguments is rather transparent. You can
to familiarize with optional arguments in more detail in [22].
Other way of definition of optional arguments of functions
and procedures consists in use of the template "_.", representing
an optional argument with a default value specified by built–in
Default function – Default[w] = Value. Let's note, the necessary
values for call Default[w] for a tool w must always precede an
optional argument of the w tool. Values defined for Default[w]
are saved in DefaultValues[w]. Fragment below illustrates told:
In[1346]:= Default[w] = 5;
In[1347]:= w[x_., y_., z_.] := {x, y, z}; {w[], w[42, 47], w[42]}
Out[1347]= {{5, 5, 5}, {42, 47, 5}, {42, 5, 5}}
58
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
More detailed information on this way can be found in [15]
and by a call ?Default in the current session of Mathematica. At
the same time all considered approaches to the organization of
work with optional arguments do not give the chance to define
values by default for an arbitrary tuple of formal arguments.
The reception described below on a simple example can be
for this purpose used. Definition of a procedure G for which we
going to make all three formal arguments x, y and z optional, is
made out as follows: Res defines the list of formal arguments in
string format, Def determines the list of values by default for all
formal arguments, the procedure body is made out in the form
"{Body}", moreover, of the G definition is complemented with
an obligatory argument Opt which represents the binary list of
signs whose elements correspond to Res list elements. The zero
element of the Opt list determines non-obligation of the Res list
element corresponding to it, and vice versa. After the specified
definition of the procedure body (d) the StringReplaceVars [16]
procedure which provides substitution in the procedure body
of the actual arguments (sign 1) or their values by default (sign 0)
is applied to it. So, the procedure call G[x, y, z, Opt] returns the
simplified value of the source procedure body on the arguments
transferred to it. The simple example visually illustrates told.
In[7]:= G[x_., y_., z_., Opt_] := Module[{Res = {"x", "y", "z"},
Def = Map[ToString1[#] &, {42, 47, 67}],
args = Map[ToString1[#] &, {x, y, z}], b, c, d},
d = "Simplify[{b = (x + y)/(x + z); c = b*x*y*z; (b + c)^2}]";
d = StringReplaceVars[d, Map[If[Opt[[#]] == 0, Res[[#]] –>
Def[[#]], Res[[#]] –> args[[#]]] &, Range[Length[Res]]]];
ToExpression[d][[1]]]
In[8]:= G[a, s, t, {0, 1, 1}]
Out[8]= ((42 + s)^2*(1 + 42*s*t)^2)/(42 + t)^2
In[9]:= G[a, s, t, {1, 1, 1}]
Out[9]= ((a + s)^2*(1 + a*s*t)^2)/(a + t)^2
In[10]:= G[a, s, t, {0, 0, 0}]
Out[10]= 138557641644601/11881
In certain cases the above reception can be rather useful.
59
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
The problem for testing of correctness of the tuple of formal
arguments in the user modules, blocks or functions can be solved
by procedure whose call CorrTupleArgs[x] returns True if tuple
of formal arguments of a procedure or a function x is correct in
the sense stated above, and False otherwise [8,16].
On the other hand, the problem of preliminary definition of
correctness of the factual arguments passing to a procedure or a
function is of a rather interesting. If tool has no mechanisms of
testing of actual arguments passing to it at a call, then the call
on incorrect actual arguments as a rule is returned unevaluated.
The procedure TestActArgs is one of variants of solution of the
problem, whose call TestActArgs[x, y] returns empty list if tuple
of actual arguments meets the tuple of testing functions of the
corresponding formal arguments of x, otherwise the procedure
call trough y returns the integer list of numbers of the formal
arguments to which inadmissible actual arguments are supposed
to be passed [1-16].
Meantime, use of the above procedure assumes that testing
for correctness of actual arguments for formal arguments with
patterns {"__", "___"} is carried out only for the first elements
of tuples of actual arguments passing to formal arguments with
the appropriate patterns. Whereas further development of the
procedure is left to the interested reader as a useful exercise. In
addition, it should be noted the important circumstance. If in
the traditional programming languages the identification of an
arbitrary procedure or function is made according to its name,
in case of Math–language the identification is made according
to its heading. This circumstance is caused by that the definition
of a procedure or function in the Math-language is made by the
manner different from traditional [1]. Simultaneous existence of
procedures of the same name with different headings in such
situation is admissible as it illustrates a simple fragment:
In[2434]:= M[x_, y_] := Module[{}, x + y];
M[x_] := Module[{}, x^2]; M[y_] := Module[{}, y^3];
M[x___] := Module[{}, {x}]
In[2435]:= Definition[M]
60
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
Out[2435]= M[x_, y_] := Module[{}, x + y]
M[y_] := Module[{}, y^3]
M[x___] := Module[{}, {x}]
At the call of procedure or function of the same name from
the list is chosen the one, whose formal arguments of heading
correspond to actual arguments of the call, otherwise the call is
returned unevaluated, excepting simplifications of arguments
according to the standard system agreements. At compliance of
formal arguments of heading with actual ones the component of
x procedure or function is caused, whose definition is the first
in the list returned at the call Definition[x]; particularly, whose
definition has been evaluated in the Mathematica by the first.
Therefore, in order to avoid possible misunderstandings in case
of procedure override with a name x, which includes a change
of its header also, the call Clear[x] must first undo the previous
procedure definition.
The works [1-16] present a range of interesting software for
dealing with the headings and formal arguments that make up
them. In particular, the following tools can be mentioned:
ProcQ[x] – returns True if x is a procedure and False otherwise;
BlockModQ[x] – returns True if x is a name defining a block or
module; otherwise False is returned. At that, thru optional argument
y – an indefinite variable the call BlockModQ[x, y] returns the type
of the object x in the context of {"Block", "Module"} on condition that
main result is True;
ArgsP[x] – returns the list whose elements – formal arguments
of Block or Module x – are grouped with the preceding words Block
and Module. Groups arise in the case of multiple object definition x;
In[72]:= ArgsP[x_ /; BlockModQ[x]] := Module[{b, c = {}, j,
a = Headings[x]},
a = If[MemberQ3[a, {"Module", "Block"}], a, {a}];
b = Length[a];
Do[Map[AppendTo[c, If[StringFreeQ[#, "["], #,
StringReplace[StringTake[#, StringLength[#] – 1],
ToString[x] <> "[" –> "{"] <> "}"]] &, a[[j]]], {j, 1, b}];
ToExpression[c]]
61
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
In[73]:= M[x_ /; IntegerQ[x]] := Module[{}, x^2];
M[x_, y_] := Module[{}, x*y^3]; M[x__] := Module[{}, {x}];
M[x_, y__] := Block[{a = 42, b = 47}, {a*x, b*y}]
In[74]:= ArgsP[M]
Out[74]= {Block, {x_, y__}, Module, {x_ /; IntegerQ[x]},
{x_, y_}, {x__}}
RenameP[x, y] – returns the empty list, renaming a Function,
Block or Module x to a name, defined by the second argument y with
its activation in the current session; note, object x remains unchanged
In[32]:= RenameP[x_ /; BlockFuncModQ[x], y_Symbol] :=
ReplaceAll[ToExpression[Map[StringReplace[#,
ToString[x] <> "[" –> ToString[y] <> "[", 1] &,
DefToStrM[x]]], Null –> Nothing]
In[33]:= M[x_ /; IntegerQ[x]] := Module[{}, x^2];
M[x_, y_] := Module[{}, x*y^3]; M[x__] := Module[{}, {x}];
M[x_, y__] := Block[{}, {x, y}]
In[34]:= RenameP[M, Agn]
Out[34]= {}
In[35]:= Definition[Agn]
Out[35]= Agn[x_ /; IntegerQ[x]] := Module[{}, x^2]
Agn[x_, y_] := Module[{}, x*y^3]
Agn[x_, y__] := Block[{}, {x, y}]
Agn[x__] := Module[{}, {x}]
Note that we have programmed a lot of other useful tools
for different processing of both the headings, as a whole, and
their separate components, first of all, formal arguments [1-16].
Some of these are used in examples given in this book. Before
further consideration, it should be noted once again that, the
block and module headings handling tools are also functionally
suitable for the classical functions determined by the headings
according to a general mechanism used by the blocks, modules,
and classical functions. Thus, what is said about the procedure
headings fully applies to functions, making it easy to convert
the second ones to the first.
One of the main tasks at working with formal arguments is
62
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
to define them for the user procedures (modules and blocks) and
functions. In this direction, we have created a number of means
of various purposes. At the same time, the definition of testing
functions for formal arguments may itself contain definitions of
procedures and functions, which implies consideration is given
to this circumstance in the development of means of processing
formal arguments. So, the ArgsProcFunc procedure considers
this circumstance illustrating it on an example of its application
to the M procedure presented below.
The procedure call ArgsProcFunc[x] generally returns the
nested list whose single elements define formal arguments in
the string format, and 2–element sub–lists by the first element
define formal arguments, while by the second define the testing
functions assigned to them (conditions of their admissibility) also
in the string format of a procedure, block or function x.
In[1938]:= ArgsProcFunc[x_ /; BlockModQ[x]] :=
Module[{a = Definition1[x], b, c = "", d, j, f, g},
d = StringLength[g = ToString[x]]; c = g;
For[j = d + 1, j <= StringLength[a], j++,
If[! SyntaxQ[g = g <> StringTake[a, {j, j}]], Continue[], Break[]]];
b = StringReplace[g, c <> "[" –> ",", 1];
b = StringInsert[b, ",", –1]; c = "";
Do[c = c <> StringTake[b, {j, j}]; If[SyntaxQ[c], Break[],
Continue[]], {j, 1, StringLength[b]}];
d = StringDrop[c, –2] <> ","; c = {};
Label[Agn];
f = StringPosition[d, ","];
f = DeleteDuplicates[Flatten[f]];
For[j = 2, j <= Length[f], j++,
If[SyntaxQ[g = StringTake[d, {f[[1]] + 1, f[[j]] – 1}]],
AppendTo[c, g]; d = StringReplace[d, "," <> g –> "", 1];
Goto[Agn], Continue[]]];
c = Map[StringReplace[#, GenRules[{"___", "__", " /;", "_:",
"_.", "_"}, "@$@"], 1] &, c];
c = Map[StringTrim[#] &, Map[StringSplit[#, "@$@"] &, c]];
Map[If[Length[#] == 1, #[[1]], If[SuffPref[#[[2]], g = "/; ", 1],
{#[[1]], StringReplace[#[[2]], g –> "", 1]}, #]] &, c]]
63
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
In[1939]:= M[x_, y_ /; {g[t_] := Module[{}, t^2], If[g[y] > 50,
True, False]}[[2]], r_: 77, p_., z___] :=
Module[{}, x*y*r*p/g[z]]
In[1940]:= {M[77, 8, 42, 72, 7], M[77, 7, 42, 72, 7]}
Out[1940]= {38016, M[77, 7, 42, 72, 7]}
In[1941]:= Definition[g]
Out[1941]= g[t_] := Module[{}, t^2]
In[1942]:= ArgsProcFunc[M]
Out[1942]= {"x", {"y", "{g[t_] := Module[{}, t^2], If[g[y] > 50,
True, False]}[[2]]"}, {"r", "77"}, "p", "z"}
It follows from the fragment that for a tool defined in the
testing function of a formal argument, the availability domain
is the entire current session, including the procedure body that
generated it. ArgsProcFunc1 and ArgsProcFunc2 procedures,
unlike ArgsProcFunc, are based on other principles, returning
the lists of formal arguments with testing functions ascribed to
them, while thtough the second optional argument is returned
the same list with elements in the string format.
In[19]:= ArgsProcFunc1[x_ /; BlockFuncModQ[x], y___] :=
Module[{a = Definition1[x], b, c = "", d, j, f, g},
d = StringLength[g = ToString[x]]; c = g;
For[j = d + 1, j <= StringLength[a], j++,
If[! SyntaxQ[g = g <> StringTake[a, {j, j}]], Continue[], Break[]]];
b = ToExpression["{" <> StringTrim[g, {c <> "[", "]"}] <> "}"];
If[{y} == {}, b, If[SymbolQ[y], b; y = Map[ToString1, b]]]]
In[20]:= ArgsProcFunc1[M, t]
Out[20]= {"x_", "y_ /; {g[t_] := Module[{}, t^2], If[g[y] > 50,
True, False]}[[2]]", "r_:77", "p_.", "z___"}
In[77]:= ArgsProcFunc2[x_ /; BlockFuncModQ[x], y___] :=
Module[{a = ToExpression[HeadPFU[x]], b = {}, c, k},
Do[c = Quiet[Check[Part[a, k], Error, Part::partw]];
If[c === Error, Return[If[{y} == {}, b, If[SymbolQ[y], b;
y = Map[ToString1, b], b]]], AppendTo[b, c]], {k, Infinity}]]
In[78]:= ArgsProcFunc2[M]
Out[78]= {x_, y_ /; {g[t_] := Module[{}, t^2], If[g[y] > 50,
True, False]}[[2]], r_ : 77, p_., z___}
64
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
The question of processing of the formal arguments with
good reason can be considered as the first problem relating to
the calculations of the tuples of formal arguments of the user
functions, modules and blocks that have been activated in the
current session directly or on the basis of download of packages
containing their definitions. In our works [1-15] certain tools for
the solution of this problem have been programmed in the form
of procedures Args, Args0 ÷ Args2, then we presented similar tools
in narrower assortment and with the improved some functional
characteristics. Above all, as a rather useful tool, we present the
Args3 procedure whose call Args3[x] returns the list of formal
arguments of the user module, block or function x. At the same
time, the argument x can present an multiple object of the same
name. The following fragment represents the sourse code of the
Args3 procedure with the most typical examples of its use.
In[3122]:= M[x_ /; SameQ[x, "avz"], y_] := Module[{a, b, c}, y];
M[x_ /; x == "avz"] := Module[{a, b, c}, x];
M[x_ /; IntegerQ[x], y_String] := Module[{a, b, c}, x];
M[x_, y_] := Module[{a, b, c}, "agn"; x + y]; M[x_String] := x;
M[x_ /; ListQ[x], y_] := Block[{a, b, c}, "agn"; Length[x] + y];
F[x_ /; SameQ[x, "avz"], y_] := {x, y}
In[3123]:= Args3[s_ /; BlockFuncModQ[s]] :=
Module[{a = Headings[s], b, c = 7},
If[SimpleListQ[a], a = {a}, Set[c, 77]]; a = Map[#[[2]] &, a];
b = Map[StringReplace[#, ToString[s] –> "", 1] &, a];
b = Map[StringToList[StringTake[#, {2, –2}]] &, b];
If[c == 77, b, Flatten[b, 1]]]
In[3124]:= Args3[M]
Out[3124]= {{"x_ /; ListQ[x]", "y_"}, {"x_", "y_", "z_"},
{"x_ /; x === \"avz\"", "y_"}}
In[3125]:= Args3[F]
Out[3125]= {"x_ /; x === \"avz\"", "y_"}
In[3126]:= Args3[L]
Out[3126]= {"x_", "y_"}
At that, in a case of the returned nested list its sublists define
tuples of formal arguments in the order that is defined by order
of components of x object according to the call Definition[x].
65
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
The following procedure is an useful modification of our
argument processing means. The call ArgsBFM1[x] generally
returns the list of the ListList type whose two-element sublists
in string format determine the name of a formal argument (1st
element) and its admissibility test (2nd element) of block, function
or module x. Lack of the test is coded as "Arbitrary"; in addition,
under lack of test is understood not only its actual lack, but also
the optional or default patterns ascribed to a formal argument.
The procedure successfully processes the objects of the same
name too, i.e. objects with several headings. The next fragment
represents source code of the ArgsBFM1 procedure with typical
examples of its application.
In[3336]:= ArgsBFM1[x_ /; BlockFuncModQ[x]] :=
Module[{b, c, d, g = {}, t, a = ToString2[Args[x]]},
a = If[QmultiplePF[x], a, {a}];
Do[{b, c, d} = {{}, {}, {}}; t = a[[j]];
Do[AppendTo[b, If[ListQ[t[[k]]],
Map[StringSplit[#, {"/;", "__", "___", "_", ":", "_:", "_."}] &, t[[k]]],
StringSplit[t[[k]], {"/;", "__", "___", "_", ":", "_:", "_."}]]], {k, Length[t]}];
Do[AppendTo[c, If[NestListQ[b[[k]]],
Map[Map[If[#1 == " " || #1 == "", Nothing,
StringTrim[#1]] &, #] &, b[[k]]],
Map[If[# == " "||#1 == "", Nothing, StringTrim[#]] &, b[[k]]]]],
{k, 1, Length[b]}];
Do[AppendTo[d, If[NestListQ[c[[k]]],
Map[If[Length[#1] == 1, {#1[[1]], "Arbitrary"}, #1] &, c[[k]]],
If[Length[c[[k]]] == 1, {c[[k]][[1]], "Arbitrary"}, c[[k]]]]],
{k, 1, Length[c]}]; d = If[Length[d] == 1, d[[1]], d];
AppendTo[g, d], {j, Length[a]}]; If[Length[g] == 1, g[[1]], g]]
In[3337]:= G[x_, y_List, z_ : 77, h___] := Module[{g = 72}, Body];
G[x_, y_List, z_ : 78, {x1_, x2_List, x3_ : 90}, h___] :=
Module[{v = 42, g = 47, a = 87, k = 96, s = 67}, Body]
In[3338]:= ArgsBFM1[G]
Out[3338]= {{{"x", "Arbitrary"}, {"y", "List"}, {"z", "78"},
{{"x1", "Arbitrary"}, {"x2", "List"}, {"x3", "90"}}, {"h", "Arbitrary"}},
{{"x", "Arbitrary"}, {"y", "List"}, {"z", "77"}, {"h", "Arbitrary"}}}
The procedure has a number of useful applications [16].
66
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
Several useful tools have been created to work with arguments
of blocks, functions and modules [16]. One example is the procedure
whose call Args2[x] returns the list of formal arguments with testing
functions assigned to them in string format for a module, function, or
block x. While calling Args2[x, y] with the second optional argument
y – an undefined symbol – via it returns the list consisting of 2–element
sub–lists whose elements in string format represent arguments and
testing functions ascribed to them.
In[111]:= Default[Sg, 6, 42]; Sg[x_, y_Integer, z_ /; EvenQ[z], t__,
h_: 0, g_.] := x*y + z + t + h*g
In[112]:= Args2[x_ /; BlockFuncModQ[x], y___] :=
Module[{a = Definition2[x][[1]], b = "", c, d = {}, t},
a = StringReplace5[a, {ToString[x] <> "[" –> "{", "] := " –> "}"}, 1];
Do[If[SyntaxQ[b = b <> StringTake[a, {j}]], Break[], 7], {j, Infinity}];
b = StringToList[StringTake[b, {2, –2}]];
If[{y} != {} && SymbolQ[y], c = Map[StringSplit[#, "_"] &, b];
y = Map[If[Length[#] == 1, AppendTo[d, #],
If[SuffPref[#[[2]], t = " /; ", 1],
AppendTo[d, {#[[1]], StringReplace[#[[2]], t –> ""]}],
If[SuffPref[#[[2]], ":", 1],
AppendTo[d, {#[[1]], "Optional"}], If[SuffPref[#[[2]], ".", 1],
AppendTo[d, {#[[1]], "Default"}], AppendTo[d, #}]]]]] &, c];
y = DeleteDuplicates[Flatten[y, 1]];
y = Map[If[Length[#] == 1, #[[1]], #] &, y], 7]; b]
In[113]:= Args2[Sg, sv]
Out[113]= {"x_", "y_Integer", "z_ /; EvenQ[z]", "t__", "h_:0", "g_."}
In[114]:= sv
Out[114]= {"x", {"y", "Integer"}, {"z", "EvenQ[z]"}, "t",
{"h", "Optional"}, {"g", "Default"}}
In[115]:= StringReplace5[x_String, y_ /; ListRulesQ[y],
z_Integer] := Module[{a = x}, Do[a = StringReplace[a, y[[j]], z],
{j, Length[y]}]; a]
In[116]:= StringReplace5["12345612345", {"2" –> "a", "4" –> "b",
"c" –> "d"}, 1]
Out[116]= "1a3b5612345"
The call StringReplace5[x, y, z] unlike the StringReplace of the
same call format returns result of replacements only the first z entries
of left part of each rule from a list y onto its right part in a string x.
67
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
It is worth noting that the permissibility of W constructions
that include modules, blocks and functions including built–in
ones, provided that BooleanQ[W] = True, makes it possible to
conveniently include various kinds of diagnostic information in
such constructs, as illustrated by the following simple example:
In[3337]:= T[x_ /; If[x > 50, {Print["Invalid first argument:
it must be greater than 50"], False}, True],
y_ /; If[IntegerQ[y], True, Print["Invalid second argument:
it must be an integer"]; False],
z_ /; If[PrimeQ[z], {g[t_] := t^2, True}[[2]], {Print["Invalid
third argument: it must be a prime"], False}]] := g[x*y*z]
In[3338]:= T[100, 7, 7]
Invalid first argument: it must be greater than 50
Out[3338]= T[100, 7, 7]
In[3339]:= T[50, 42/77, 7]
Invalid second argument: it must be an integer
Out[3339]= T[50, 6/11, 7]
In[3340]:= T[50, 77, 4]
Invalid third argument: it must be a prime
Out[3340]= T[50, 77, 4]
In[3341]:= T[50, 77, 7]
Out[3341]= 72630250
In[3342]:= Definition[g]
Out[3342]= g[t_] := t^2
Thus, the testing function for a formal x argument can be
an arbitrary expression w[x], for that the ratio BooleanQ[W[x]] =
True will be true. Moreover, in addition to printing of diagnostic
information, testing expressions w[x] may include definitions
of modules, blocks and functions whose definitions are activated
only if the actual argument x is valid, making their available in
the body of an original procedure or function and in the current
session as a whole. This possibility is illustrated in the above
function T by the function g activated only at call T[x, y, z] with
valid values for the formal arguments {x, y, z}. So, definitions of
formal arguments of modules, blocks, functions allow a rather
wide range of testing expressions to be used for them.
68
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
Here it is necessary to make an essential remark concerning
the tools that deal with arguments of procedures and functions.
The matter is that as it was shown earlier, testing tools ascribed
to the formal arguments, as a rule, consist of the earlier defined
testing functions or the reserved key words defining the type,
for example, Integer. Whereas as a side effect the builtin Math–
language allows to use the constructions that contain definitions
of the testing means, directly in headings of the procedures and
functions. Interesting examples of that have been represented
above. Meanwhile, despite of such possibility, the programmed
means are oriented, as a rule, on use for testing of admissibility
of the factual arguments or the predefined means, or including
the testing algorithms in the body of procedures and functions.
For this reason, the Args procedure along with similar to it in
such cases can return incorrect results. Whereas the procedure
ArgsU covers such peculiar cases. The procedure call ArgsU[x]
regardless of way of definition of testing of factual arguments
in the general case returns the nested list whose elements are 3–
element sublists of strings; the 1st element of such sublists is the
name of formal argument, the second element defines template
ascribed to this formal argument, and the 3rd element defines a
testing function, construction including definition of the testing
function, a key word, or an optional value, otherwise the third
element is the empty string, i.e. "". The next fragment presents
source code of the ArgsU procedure with examples of its use.
In[7]:= ArgsU[x_ /; BlockFuncModQ[x]] :=
Module[{a = HeadPFU[x], b, c, d = {}, g},
a = StringTake[a, {StringLength[ToString[x]] + 2, –2}];
c = StringPartition2[a, ","];
b[t_] := {StringTake[t, {1, Set[g, Flatten[StringPosition[t, "_"]][[1]]] – 1}],
StringTake[t, {g, –1}]}; c = Quiet[Map[StringTrim@b@# &, c]];
c = Quiet[Map[{#[[1]], StringReplace[#[[2]], " /; " –> "", 1]} &, c]];
Map[If[SuffPref[#[[2]], "___", 1],
AppendTo[d, {#[[1]], "___", StringTrim2[#[[2]], "_", 1]}],
If[SuffPref[#[[2]], "__", 1],
AppendTo[d, {#[[1]], "__", StringTrim2[#[[2]], "_", 1]}],
If[SuffPref[#[[2]], "_:", 1],
AppendTo[d, {#[[1]], "_:", StringReplace[#[[2]], "_:" –> "", 1]}],
69
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
If[SuffPref[#[[2]], "_.", 1],
AppendTo[d, {#[[1]], "_.", StringReplace[#[[2]], "_." –> "", 1]}],
If[SuffPref[#[[2]], "_", 1],
AppendTo[d, {#[[1]], "_", StringTrim2[#[[2]], "_", 1]}]]]]]] &, c];
If[Length[d] == 1, d[[1]], d]]
In[8]:= Ak[x_, h_ /; IntegerQ[h], y_ /; {IntOddQ[t_/; IntegerQ[t]] :=
Module[{}, IntegerQ[t] && OddQ[t]], IntOddQ[y]}[[–1]],
p_ : 77, t_.] := x*y*h*p*t
In[9]:= Args[Ak]
ToExpression::sntx: Invalid syntax in or before
"{x_, h_ /; IntegerQ[h], y_ /; {IntOddQ[t_ /; IntegerQ[t]}".
Out[9]= $Failed
In[10]:= ArgsU[Ak]
Out[10]= {{"x", "_", ""}, {"h", "_", "IntegerQ[h]"},
{"y", "_", "{IntOddQ[t_/; IntegerQ[t]] := Module[{}, IntegerQ[t] &&
OddQ[t]], IntOddQ[y]}[[–1]]"}, {"p", "_:", "77"}, {"t", "_.", ""}}
The ArgsTypes procedure [8] serves for testing of the formal
arguments of block, function or module activated in the current
session. So, the call ArgsTypes[x] returns the nested list, whose
2-element sublists in the string format define names of formal
arguments and their admissible types (in the broader sense the tests
for their admissibility with initial values by default) respectively. In
lack of a type an argument it is defined as "Arbitrary" which is
characteristic for arguments of pure functions and arguments
without the tests and/or initial values ascribed to them and also
which have format patterns {"__", "___"}. The fragment below
represents source code of the ArgsTypes procedure along with
typical examples of its application.
Moreover, the ArgsTypes procedure successfully processes
the above cases "objects of the same name with various headings",
returning the nested two-element lists of the formal arguments
concerning the subobjects composing an object x, in the order
defined by the Definition function. And in this case 2–element
lists have the format, represented above while for objects with
empty list of formal arguments the empty list is returned, i.e. {}.
Unlike ArgsTypes of the same name this procedure processes
objects, including pure functions and Compile functions.
70
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
2.4. Local variables in Mathematica procedures
The list of local variables of the procedure in its definition
is located at once behind the open parenthesis "[". This list can
be as empty, and to contain variables (perhaps with their initial
values) which scope is limited to a framework of the procedure,
i.e. values of variables from the mentioned list of locals in the
current session up a procedure call match their values after exit
from the procedure. All other variables of a procedure that are
not entering the locals list rely as the global for the procedure in
scope of the current session with the system.
At the same time initial values for local variables can be both
simple and rather complex expressions. In particular, through
local variables it is possible to define procedures and functions
available in the current session beyond the procedure containing
their definitions as illustrates a simple example:
In[85]:= P[x_, y_] := Module[{a = SetDelayed[b[c_],
Module[{}, c^2]], d = 7, c = 8}, b[x] + d*x + c*y]
In[86]:= P[42, 47]
Out[86]= 2434
In[87]:= Definition[b]
Out[87]= b[c_] := Module[{}, c^2]
In[88]:= P1[x_, y_] := Module[{a = b[c_] := Module[{}, c^2],
d = 7, c = 8}, b[x] + d*x + c*y]
In[89]:= P1[42, 47]
Out[89]= 2434
In[90]:= P1[x_, y_, b_ /; ! ValueQ[b]] := Module[{d = 7, c = 8,
a = b[c_] := Module[{}, c^2]}, b[x] + d*x + c*y]
In[91]:= P1[42, 47, Name]
Out[91]= 2434
In[92]:= Definition[Name1]
Out[92]= Name[c_] := Module[{}, c^2]
In[93]:= P[x_, y_, b_ /; ! ValueQ[b]] := Module[{d = 7,
a = SetDelayed[b[c_], Module[{}, c^2]],
c = If[b[x] < 100, 0, 7]}, b[x] + d*x + c*y]
In[93]:= P[200, 10, Name]
Out[93]= 41960
71
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
Variable b in this example is global while the local variable a
can be used arbitrary in procedure body without influencing on
the variable of the same name outside of the procedure. At last,
a simple modification of the above example allows to define in
addition in procedure P1 a name for procedure b generated in
its local variables. Note that a procedure or function generated
in the list of local variables can successfully be called in initial
values of other local variables of the procedure as appears from
the above example.
We have created a number of tools to work with local user
procedure variables [8,16]. Among them, LocalsMod procedure
is of some interest.
In[2441]:= Avz[x_] := Module[{t, a = 77, b = k + t, d = Jn[x],
c = {m, {h, g}}}, a[t_] := t^2 + a*d; a[x] + d^2]
In[2442]:= LocalsMod[x_ /; BlockModQ[x]] :=
Module[{a = Definition1[x], b, c = {}, d, j, f, g},
b = Flatten[StringPosition[a, {"Module[", "Block["}, 1]][[-1]];
b = StringTake[a, {1, b}]; b = StringReplace[a, b –> ""];
Do[c = c <> StringTake[b, {j, j}];
If[SyntaxQ[c], Break[], Continue[]], {j, 1, StringLength[b]}];
d = "," <> StringDrop[StringDrop[c, 1], –1] <> ","; c = {};
Label[Agn];
f = StringPosition[d, ","];
f = DeleteDuplicates[Flatten[f]];
For[j = 2, j <= Length[f], j++,
If[SyntaxQ[g = StringTake[d, {f[[1]] + 1, f[[j]] – 1}]],
AppendTo[c, g]; d = StringReplace[d, "," <> g –> "", 1];
Goto[Agn], Continue[]]];
c = Map[If[StringFreeQ[#, "="], {StringTrim[#], "Null"},
{g = Flatten[StringPosition[#, "=", 1]][[1]],
{StringTake[#, {1, g – 2}],
StringTake[#, {g + 2, StringLength[#]}]}}[[2]]] &, c];
SetAttributes[StringTrim, Listable];
Map[StringTrim[#] &, c]]
In[2443]:= LocalsMod[Avz]
Out[2443]= {{"t", "Null"}, {"a", "77"}, {"b", "k + t"},
{"d", "Sin[x]"}, {"c", "{m, {h, g}}"}}
72
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
The previous fragment represents the source code of the
procedure with an example of its use. Thus, the procedure call
LocalsMod[x] returns a nested list whose two-element sub-lists
as the first element defines a local variable of a procedure x in
the string format, whereas the second element defines the initial
condition assigned to it in the string format. If condition is not
presented, then the second element is "Null". If procedure x has
no local variables, then the call LocalsMod[x] returns the empty
list, i.e. {}. The procedure has a number of useful applications.
Between the main objects (function, block, module) there is a
mutual converting of one object to another if not to take global
and local variables into account. Because of an opportunity and
expediency of use of mechanism of local variables is reasonable
convertings of both classical, and pure functions to procedures
(blocks, modules). The MathToolBox package [4-7,16] provides a
number of tools for different conversion cases. As an example
of certain practical interest, the FunctToProc procedure can be
cited. The procedure call FuncToProc[x, N] returns nothing, at
the same time transforming a classical or pure function x to the
procedure with name N with the same set of formal arguments
along with a set of local variables created from global variables
of the function x. Simple examples illustrate the application of
the FuncToProc procedure.
FuncToProc[x_, N_] := Module[{a, b=GlobalsInFunc[x], c},
If[PureFuncQ[x], PureFuncToFunction[x, N];
c = DefToStr[N], If[FunctionQ[x], c = DefToStr[x],
Return["The first argument – not function"]]];
c = StringInsert[c, "Module[" <>
ToString[ToExpression[b]] <> ", ",
StringPosition[c, ":=", 1][[1]][[2]] + 2];
ToExpression[StringReplacePart[c, ToString[N],
StringPosition[c, "[", 1][[1]][[1]] – 1] <> "]"]]
In[10]:= G := Function[{x, y, z}, p*(x + y + z)]
In[11]:= T := p*(#1^2 + #2^2*#3^n) &
In[12]:= F[x_, y_] := x*y + Module[{a = 5, b = 6}, a*x + b*y]
In[13]:= FuncToProc[G, H]
73
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
In[14]:= Definition[H]
Out[14]= H[x_, y_, z_] := Module[{p}, p*(x + y + z)]
In[15]:= FuncToProc[T, V]
In[16]:= Definition[V]
Out[16]= V[x1_, x2_, x3_] := Module[{n, p}, p*(x1^2 +
x2^2*x3^n)]
In[17]:= FuncToProc[F, W]
In[18]:= Definition[W]
Out[18]= W[x_, y_] := Module[{a, b}, x*y + Module[{a = 5,
b = 6}, a*x + b*y]]
DefToStr[x_ /; SymbolQ[x] || StringQ[x]] := Module[{a, c,
b = "*" <> ToString[x]}, c = Map[If[StringFreeQ[#, b], #,
StringTake[#, {1, Flatten[StringPosition[#, b]][[1]] – 1}]] &,
StringSplit[ToString[InputForm[Definition[x]]], "\n \n"]];
If[Length[c] == 1, c[[1]], c]]
In[19]:= DefToStr[F]
Out[19]= "F[x_, y_] := x*y + Module[{a = 5, b = 6}, a*x + b*y]"
Along with a number of tools from the package [3-5,16], the
procedure uses a procedure whose call DefToStr[x] returns the
Input-expression of a symbol x definition in string format, that,
generally speaking, the built–in ToString function is not able to
do. Meanwhile, a rather significant remark needs to be made
regarding the DefToStr tool. As noted repeatedly, Mathematica
system differentiates objects not by their names, but by their
headers, if any. It is therefore quite real that we may deal with
different definitions under the same name. This applies to all
objects that have headers. In view of this circumstance, we have
developed a number of funds for various cases of application
[1-16]. This can be fully attributed to the above DefToStr tool,
whose call on a symbol having multiple definitions produce a
correct result, i.e. the DefToStr procedure solves this problem.
In the case of multiplicity of a symbol definition the procedure
call DefToStr[x] returns the list of Input-expressions of a symbol
x definitions in string format, that the builtin ToString function
generally speaking, is not able to do. In some cases, the method
74
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
may be useful in practical programming. Note, that the actual x
argument in DefToStr[x] call must be of type Symbol or String (if
for x there are headers) or String (if for x there are no headers), while
on built-in system functions its call returns attributes ascribed
to them. This procedure is rather demanded when processing
multiple definitions of a function, block or module.
In[11]:= G[x_, y_] := p*(x^2 + y^2)
In[12]:= G[x_, y_, z_] := (x^2 + y^2 + z^2)
In[13]:= G[x_, y_, z_ /; IntegerQ[z]] := Module[{}, x*y +
42*x^2 + 47*y^2 + z^3]
In[14]:= F[x_, y_] := x*y + 42*x^2 + 47*y^2
In[15]:= DefToStr[G]
Out[15]= {"G[x_, y_] := p*(x^2 + y^2)",
"G[x_, y_, z_ /; IntegerQ[z]] := Module[{}, x*y +
42*x^2 + 47*y^2 + z^3]",
"G[x_, y_, z_] := x^2 + y^2 + z^2"}
In[16]:= DefToStr[F]
Out[16]= "F[x_, y_] := x*y + 42*x^2 + 47*y^2"
Experience has shown that the use of the procedure is quite
effective in many applications.
For work with local and global variables of procedures we
created a number of enough useful tools that are absent among
the built-in system tools [16]. Their detailed description can be
found in [1-15]. In particular, the GlobalToLocalInit procedure
provides expansion of the list of local variables of a procedure
at the expense of its global variables. Moreover, for the local
variables received from global variables the initial values rely
those that at the time of the procedure call had global variables.
In the absence of global variables the procedure call returns the
corresponding message. The call GlobalToLocalInit[x] returns
nothing, generating in the current session the procedure with
name $$x with the updated list of local variables. The following
program fragment illustrates told:
In[712]:= GS[x_, y_, z_ /; IntegerQ[z]] := Module[{a= 72,
b = 77}, t*(x^2 + n*y^2 + v*Sin[p]*T[z]*z^2)/g*W[a, b]]
75
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
In[713]:= {t, n, p, v} = {2, 7, 6, 9}; T[x_] := x^2; W[x_, y_] := x*y;
In[714]:= GlobalToLocalInit[x_ /; BlockModQ[x]] :=
Module[{a = Args[x], b, c, d, f}, b = DefToStr[x];
c = ArgsLocalsGlobals1[x];
Quiet[d = Select[Flatten[Select[c[[3]],
! "System`" == #[[1]] &]], ! ContextQ[#] &]];
d = Select[d, ! BlockFuncModQ[#] &];
If[d == {}, Return["No global variables"],
Map[If[! Definition[#] === Null, #,
ToExpression[# <> "= " <> #]] &, d];
ToExpression["Save[\"#\"," <> ToString1[d] <> "]"];
f = ReadString["#"]; DeleteFile["#"];
f = Select[StringSplit[f, "\r\n"], # != " " &];
c = StringReplace[b, HeadPF[x] –> "", 1];
c = SubStrSymbolParity1[c, "{", "}"][[1]];
f = StringReplace[StringReplace[ToString[c] <>
ToString[f], "}{" –> ", "], "{, " –> "{"];
ToExpression["$$" <> StringReplace[b, c –> f, 1]]]]
In[715]:= GlobalToLocalInit[GS]
In[716]:= Definition[$$GS]
Out[716]= $$GS[x_, y_, z_ /; IntegerQ[z]] := Module[{a = 72,
b = 77, n = 7, p = 6, t = 2, v = 9},
(t*(x^2 + n*y^2 + v*Sin[p]*T[z]*z^2)*W[a, b])/g]
In[4852]:= {m, n, p} = {42, 47, 67};
In[4853]:= A[x_, y_, z_] := Module[{a := 7, b := 5, c := 77},
(a*x + b*y + c*z)*m*n*p]
In[4854]:= A[1, 2, 3]
Out[4854]= 32799984
In[4855]:= GlobalToLocalInit[A]
In[4856]:= Definition[$$A]
Out[4856]= $$A[x_, y_, z_] := Module[{a := 7, b := 5, c := 77,
n = 47, p = 67, m = 42}, (a*x + b*y + c*z)*m*n*p]
In[4857]:= {m, n, p} = {77, 72, 52};
In[4858]:= $$A[1, 2, 3]
Out[4858]= 32799984
76
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
By the way, the last example with procedure A in addition
illustrates a possibility of correct use of the delayed definitions
instead of immediate for initial values of local variables.
A function or procedure defined in a procedure body with
b name of local variable also is local whereas defined through a
local variable becomes global tool in the current session of the
system. The following example illustrates told:
In[2010]:= B[x_, y_] := Module[{a = 7, b, c := 77},
If[x < y, b[t_] := t^2, b[t_] := t^3]; (a + c)*b[x*y]]
In[2011]:= B[7, 3]
Out[2011]= 777924
In[2012]:= Definition[b]
Out[2012]= Null
In[2013]:= J[x_, y_] := Module[{a = 7, b = {b[t_, c_] :=
(t + c)^2, b}[[2]], c := 77}, (a + c)*b[x, y]]
In[2014]:= J[2, 3]
Out[2014]= 2100
In[2015]:= Definition[b]
Out[2015]= b[t_, c_] := (t + c)^2
The above mechanism works when determining headings
and local variables of the functions, blocks and modules. At the
same time, it must be kept in mind that presented mechanism
with good reason can be carried to non–standard methods of
programming which are admissible, correct and are a collateral
consequence of the built–in Math–language. Meantime, taking
into account this circumstance to programming of processing
tools of elements of procedures and functions (headings, local
variables, arguments, etc.) certain additional demands are made.
This mechanism can be considered facultative, i.e. optional to
programming of procedures and functions. At the same time it
must be kept in mind that definitions of the tools coded in the
formal arguments and local variables become active in the all
domain of the current session that isn't always acceptable. A
reception correcting such situation presents the first example of
previous fragment. The vast majority of tools presented in our
package [16] don't use this mechanism. However certain our
77
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
tools, represented in [1-15], use this mechanism, representing
certain ways of its processing. Other example of processing of
local variables – the procedure updating their initial values.
In[104]:= ReplaceLocalInit[x_ /; BlockModQ[x], y_List] :=
Module[{a = DefToStr[x], b, c, d, f = {}, k,
h = If[NestListQ[y], y, {y}]}, c = ArgsLocalsGlobals1[x];
b = Map[If[Length[#] == 1, #,
{StringReplace[#[[1]], " :" –> ""], #[[2]]}] &, Locals4[x]];
k = Map[#[[1]] &, b];
If[b == {}, ToExpression["$" <> a],
d = Map[{#[[1]], ToString[#[[2]]]} &, h];
f = Flatten[{b, d}, 1]; f = Gather[f, #1[[1]] === #2[[1]] &];
f = Map[If[Length[#] == 1, #[[1]], #] &, f];
f = Map[If[NestListQ[#] && Length[#] == 2,
#[[2]][[1]] <> "=" <> #[[2]][[2]],
If[Length[#] == 1 && MemberQ[k, #[[1]]], #[[1]],
If[Length[#] == 2 && MemberQ[k, #[[1]]],
#[[1]] <> "=" <> #[[2]], Nothing]]] &, f];
d = StringReplace[a, HeadPF[x] <> " := " –> "", 1];
d = SubStrSymbolParity1[d, "{", "}"][[1]];
ToExpression["$" <> StringReplace[a, d –> ToString[f], 1]]]]
In[105]:= B[x_] := Module[{a = 77, b, c := 72, d = 9}, Body]
In[106]:= ReplaceLocalInit[B, {{"a", 90}, {"b", 500},
{"c", 900}, {"p", 52}, {"g", 50}}]; Definition[$B]
Out[106]= $B[x_] := Module[{a=90, b=500, c=900, d=9}, Body]
In[107]:= H[x_, y_, z_] := Module[{}, y = x^2; z = x^3; x + 5]
In[108]:= ReplaceLocalInit[H, {{"a", 90}, {"b", 500},
{"c", 900}, {"p", 52}, {"g", 50}}]; Definition[$H]
Out[108]= $H[x_, y_, z_] := Module[{}, y = x^2; z = x^3; x + 5]
In[109]:= ReplaceLocalInit[B, {{"a", 90}, {"c", 900}, {"p", 52}}]
In[110]:= Definition[$B]
Out[110]= $B[x_] := Module[{a = 90, b, c = 900, d = 9}, Body]
The call ReplaceLocalInit[x, {{"a", a1}, …, {"p", p1}}] returns
nothing, activating in the current session the procedure $x that
relatively x has local variables {a,…,p} with the updated initial
values {a1,…,p1}. The fragment illustrates the source code of the
78
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
procedure with examples of its use. Other processing means of
local variables of the user procedures can be found in [1-18,22].
They sometimes significantly complement the built-in software.
Also it is worth paying attention to one moment of rather
local variables of procedures. The scope of local variables is the
procedure in which they are determined and after a procedure
call these variables are unavailable in the current Mathematica
session. The local variables have Temporary attribute which is
assigned to the variables which are created as local variables of
a procedure; they are automatically removed when they are no
longer needed. At that, local variables with attribute Temporary
conventionally receive names of the format a$nnn, where a – a
name of local variable that is defined at procedure creation and
nnn – the number based on the current serial number defined by
the system $ModuleNumber variable. Note, $ModuleNumber is
incremented every time a procedure or built-in Unique function
is called. A Mathematica session starts with $ModuleNumber
set to 1, that can be redefined, but in order to avoid the possible
conflict situations leading to decrease in efficiency, the user is
not recommended to redefine $ModuleNumber variable. For the
purpose of gaining access to local variables out of domain of the
procedures containing them it is possible to use a reception that
is based on redefinition of their Temporary attribute, namely on
its cancelling. Let's illustrate told by a simple example:
In[37]:= Gs[x_, y_, z_] := Module[{a, b},
Print[{Map[Attributes[#] &, {a, b}], {a, b}}];
a[t_, n_, m_] := t*n*m; b := 78; b*x*y*z]
In[38]:= Gs[42, 47, 67]
{{{Temporary}, {Temporary}}, {a$2666, b$2666}}
Out[38]= 10316124
In[39]:= Definition1[a$2666]
Out[39]= Null
In[40]:= b$2666
Out[40]= b$2666
In[41]:= Gs1[x_, y_, z_] := Module[{a, b, c}, Print[{a, b, c}];
{a, b, c} = {x, y, z}; a*b*c]
79
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
In[42]:= Gs1[42, 47, 67]
{a$2863, b$2863, c$2863}
Out[42]= 132258
In[43]:= {a$2863, b$2863, c$2863}
Out[43]= {a$2863, b$2863, c$2863}
In[44]:= Gs2[x_, y_, z_] := Module[{a, b, c}, Print[{a, b, c}];
Map[ClearAttributes[#, Temporary] &, {a, b, c}];
{a, b, c} = {x, y, z}; a*b*c]
In[45]:= Gs2[42, 47, 67]
{a$2873, b$2873, c$2873}
Out[45]= 132258
In[46]:= {a$2873, b$2873, c$2873}
Out[46]= {42, 47, 67}
Procedure Gs uses two local variables {a, b}; the first of them
defines a name in function definition while the second defines
simple integer variable. The procedure call returns an integer
number with output of the nested list with attributes of local
variables {a, b} and their values. It turns out that out of domain
of the procedure local variables are indefinite ones.
Procedure call Gs1[x, y, z] returns an integer number along
with output of the list of the local variables that are generated
by the procedure from {a, b, c}. It turns out that out of domain
of the procedure local variables {a, b, c} are indefinite ones.
The Gs2 procedure differs from the Gs1 procedure only in
what in its body contains cancelling of Temporary attribute for
all local variables {a, b, c}. Procedure call Gs2[x, y, z] returns an
integer number along with output of the list of local variables
that are generated by the procedure from {a, b, c}. It turns out
that out of domain of the procedure local variables {a, b, c} are
definite ones, obtaining quite concrete values. So, for ensuring
access to local variables of a procedure out of its domain it is
quite enough to cancel Temporary attribute for all (or selected)
its local variables allowing to monitor intermediate calculations
in the course of performing procedures. Such approach allows
to provide monitoring of values of local variables of procedures
80
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
that is especially important when debugging a rather large and
complex software by transferring the local variables to the level
of variables, unique for the current session. In certain cases this
approach to debugging has quite certain advantages. For such
purpose the simple LocalsInProc procedure which is based on
the predetermined variable $ModuleNumber which determines
the current serial number to be used for local variables that are
created can appear quite useful. Any Mathematica session starts
with $ModuleNumber set to 1, receiving the increment for each
new local variable in the current session. The fragment below
represents source code of the procedure with examples of use.
In[47]:= LocalsInProc[t_List] := Module[{a, b = Length[t]},
a = Map[ToString, ($ModuleNumber – 5)*
Flatten[Tuples[{1}, b]]];
Map[t[[#]] <> "$" <> a[[#]] &, Range[b]]]
In[48]:= Agn2[x_] := Module[{a, b, c, d}, Print[{a, b, c, d}];
{a, b, c, d} = {42, 47, 67, 77}; x*a*b*c]
In[49]:= Agn2[77]
{a$13366, b$13366, c$13366, d$13366}
Out[49]= 10183866
In[50]:= LocalsInProc[{"a", "b", "c", "d"}]
Out[50]= {a$13366, b$13366, c$13366, d$13366}
In[51]:= Avz[x_] := Module[{a, b, c}, Print[{a, b, c}];
a[t_] := t^2; a[x]]; Avz[77]
{a$49432, b$49432, c$49432}
Out[51]= 5929
In[52]:= LocalsInProc[{"a", "b", "c"}]
Out[52]= {"a$49432", "b$49432", "c$49432"}
The procedure call LocalsInProc[g] should follow directly
a P procedure call, where g – the list of local variables of the P
procedure, with return of the list of representations in form of
x$nn (x – a variable name and nn – an integer in string format) that
are generated for local variables of the P procedure. If g defines
the empty list, i.e. procedure P has no local variables, then the
call LocalsInProc[{}] returns the empty list, i.e. {}.
81
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
Additionally, a number of Locals ÷ Locals5 tools have been
programmed, using some useful programming techniques and
returning local variables in various sections. A typical example
is the procedure whose call Locals5[x] returns the list of local
variables in string format with initial values assigned to them,
for a module, or a block x. While calling Locals5[x, y] with the
second optional argument y – an undefined symbol – through it
additionally returns the list consisting of two-element sub-lists
whose elements in string format represent local variables and
initial values ascribed to them. If there are no local variables,
the empty list is returned. The fragment below represents the
source code of the procedure with examples of its application.
In[422]:= Locals5[x_ /; BlockModQ[x], y___] := Module[{a, b, c},
a = StringJoin[Insert[Reverse[Headings[x]], " := ", 2]] <> "[";
b = StringReplace[PureDefinition[x], a –> "", 1];
Do[c = StringTake[b, k]; If[SyntaxQ[c], Return[c], 7],
{k, StringLength[b]}];
If[c == "{}", c = {}, c = StrToList[StringTake[c, {2, –2}]]];
If[{y} == {}, c, If[SymbolQ[y],
y = Map[StringSplit[#, " = "] &, c]; c, c]]]
In[423]:= M3[x_] := Block[{a = 90, b = 49, c, h}, h = 77; x*h];
B1[x_] := Block[{a = 90, b = 50, c = {72, 77}, d = 42}, x*a*b*c*d];
B[x_] := Block[{}, x]; Locals5[M3]
Out[423]= {"a = 90", "b = 49", "c", "h"}
In[424]:= Locals5[B]
Out[424]= {}
In[425]:= Locals5[B1]
Out[425]= {"a = 90", "b = 50", "c = {72, 77}", "d = 42"}
In[426]:= Locals5[B1, agn]
Out[426]= {"a = 90", "b = 50", "c = {72, 77}", "d = 42"}
In[427]:= agn
Out[427]= {{"a", "90"}, {"b", "50"}, {"c", "{72, 77}"}, {"d", "42"}}
In[428]:= Locals5[B, vsv]; vsv
Out[428]= {}
In[429]:= Locals5[M3, art]; art
Out[429]= {{"a", "90"}, {"b", "49"}, {"c"}, {"h"}}
As an analogue of the above Locals5 procedure we presents
the Locals6 procedure which uses certain useful programming
82
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
techniques of the strings. The procedure has analogous formal
arguments and its call returns results analogous to the call of
the above Locals5 procedure. The following fragment represents
source code of the procedure with examples of its application.
In[3119]:= Locals6[x_ /; BlockModQ[x], y___] :=
Module[{a = Definition2[x][[1]], b = Headings[x], c = "", d},
a = StringReplace[a, b[[2]] <> " := " <> b[[1]] <> "[" –> ""];
Do[If[SyntaxQ[c = c <> StringTake[a, {j}]], Break[], 7], {j, Infinity}];
c = StringToList[StringTake[c, {2, –2}]];
If[{y} != {} && SymbolQ[y],
y = Map[{b =
Quiet[Check[Flatten[StringPosition[#, "="]][[1]], {}]],
If[b === {}, #, {StringTake[#, {1, b – 2}],
StringTake[#, {b + 2, –1}]}]}[[2]] &, c], 7]; c]
In[3120]:= B[x_, y_] := Block[{a=5, b, c=7}, b = (a*x+b*c*y)/(x+y) +
Sin[x + y]; If[b, 45, b, a*c]]
In[3121]:= SetAttributes[B, {Listable, Protected}]
In[3122]:= Locals6[B]
Out[122]= "{a = 5, b, c = 7}"
In[3123]:= Locals6[B, h7]
Out[3123]= {"a = 5", "b", "c = 7"}
In[3124]:= h7
Out[3124]= {{"a", "5"}, "b", {"c", "7"}}
In[3125]:= ModuleQ[StringReplaceVars]
Out[3125]= True
In[3126]:= Locals6[StringReplaceVars, g7]
Out[3126]= {"a = StringJoin[\"(\", S, \")\"]",
"L = Characters[\"`!@#%^&*(){}:\\\"\\\\/|<>?~–=+[];:'.,
1234567890_\"]", "R = Characters[\"`!@#%^&*(){}:\\\"\\\\/|<>?~–
=+[];:'., _\"]", "b", "c", "g = If[RuleQ[r], {r}, r]"}
In[3127]:= g7
Out[3127]= {{"a", "StringJoin[\"(\", S, \")\"]"},
{"L", "Characters[\"`!@#%^&*(){}:\\\"\\\\/|<>?~–=+[];:'.,
1234567890_\"]"},
{"R", "Characters[\"`!@#%^&*(){}:\\\"\\\\/|<>?~–=+[];:'.,
_\"]"}, "b", "c", {"g", "If[RuleQ[r], {r}, r]"}}
A number of other useful enough means for operating with local
variables of modules and blocks can be found in [7,10-16].
83
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
At last, it makes sense to mention one method of localization
of variables in procedures that in certain situations can be quite
convenient. The structural organization of such procedures can
be presented as follows, namely:
G[Args] := Module[{}, Save[f, {a, b, c, …}]; Procedure body;
{Res, Get[f], DeleteFile[f]}[[1]]]
A procedure can have a certain quantity of local variables
or not have them in general whereas as other local variables
any admissible variables are used, not excepting variables out
of domain of the procedure, i.e. intersection of variables from
the outside and in the procedure is allowed. For their temporary
isolation (on runtime of the procedure) from external domain of
the procedure their saving in a file f by Save function precedes
the procedure body in which these variables are used like local
variables. Whereas an exit from the procedure is made out by
the three-element list where Res – a result of the procedure call,
Get[f] – loading in the current session of file f with recovery of
values of variables {a, b, c, …} that were until the procedure call
with the subsequent deleting of file f. The following fragment
illustrates the above mechanism of localization of variables.
In[19]:= {a, b} = {42, 77}
Out[19]= {42, 77}
In[20]:= Gg[x_, y_] := Module[{}, Save["#$", {a, b, c}];
{a, b} = {47, 72}; {x*a/y*b, Get["#$"], DeleteFile["#$"]}[[1]]]
In[21]:= Gg[30, 21]
Out[21]= 33840/7
In[22]:= {a, b, c}
Out[22]= {42, 77, c}
At the same time, if the procedure has several possible exits
then each exit should be issued in analogous way. In principle,
the reception used for localization of variables described above
within the framework of the procedure can be used not only in
connection with its local variables.
In [15] we defined so–called active global variables as global
variables to which in a Block, Module the assignments are done,
84
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
whereas we understand the global variables different from the
arguments as the passive global variables whose values are only
used in objects of the specified type. In this regard tools which
allow to evaluate the passive global variables for the user blocks
and modules are being presented as a very interesting. One of
similar means – the BlockFuncModVars procedure that solves
even more general problem. The fragment represents the source
code of the procedure BlockFuncModVars along with the most
typical examples of its application.
In[24]:= BlockFuncModVars[x_ /; BlockFuncModQ[x]] :=
Module[{d, t, c = Args[x, 90], a = If[QFunction[x], {},
LocalsGlobals1[x]], s = {"System"}, u = {"Users"},
b = Flatten[{PureDefinition[x]}][[1]], h = {}}, d = ExtrVarsOfStr[b, 2];
If[a == {}, t = Map[If[Quiet[SystemQ[#]], AppendTo[s, #],
If[BlockFuncModQ[#], AppendTo[u, #], AppendTo[h, #]]] &, d];
{s, u = Select[u, # != ToString[x] &], c, MinusList[d, Join[s, u, c,
{ToString[x]}]]}, Map[If[Quiet[SystemQ[#]], AppendTo[s, #],
If[BlockFuncModQ[#], AppendTo[u, #], AppendTo[h, #]]] &, d];
{Select[s, ! MemberQ[{"$Failed", "True", "False"}, #] &],
Select[u, # != ToString[x] && ! MemberQ[a[[1]], #] &], c, a[[1]],
a[[3]], Select[h, ! MemberQ[Join[a[[1]], a[[3]], c,
{"System", "Users"}], #] &]}]]
In[25]:= A[m_, n_, p_ /; IntegerQ[p], h_ /; PrimeQ[h]] :=
Module[{a = 77}, h*(m + n + p)/a +
StringLength[ToString1[z]]/(Cos[c] + Sin[d])]
In[26]:= BlockFuncModVars[A]
Out[26]= {{"System", "Cos", "IntegerQ", "Module", "PrimeQ",
"Sin", "StringLength"}, {"Users", "ToString1"}, {"m", "n", "p", "h"},
{"a"}, {}, {"c", "d", "z"}}
The call BlockFuncModVars[x] returns the 6–element list, whose
the 1st element – the list of system functions used by block or module
x, whose 1st element is "System", whereas other names are system
functions in string format; the 2nd element – the list of the user tools
used by the block or module x, whose the 1st element is "User" while
the others define names of tools in the string format; the 3rd element
defines the list of formal arguments in the string format of the block
or module x; the 4th element – the list of local variables in the string
format; the fifth element – the list of active global variables in string
format; at last, the sixth element determines the list of passive global
variables in the string format of the block or module x.
85
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
2.5. Exit mechanisms of the user procedures (return results)
The procedure body implements a particular calculation or
processing algorithm using control sentences of Math-language
and its built–in functions along with other program tools. The
result of successful execution of the procedure body is the exit
from the procedure with purpose of return of its results to the
current session of Mathematica system. In general, the return
of results of procedure call can be organized by three manners:
(1) through the last sentence of the procedure body, (2) through
the system built–in Return function and (3) through its formal
arguments, for example, procedures A, B and H accordingly:
In[7]:= A[x_] := Module[{a = 77, b = 72, c}, c = a + b; c*x]; A[1]
Out[7]= 149
In[8]:= B[x_, y_] := Module[{a = 77, b = 72, c}, c = a + b;
Return[77*x]; c*x; a*x + b*y]; B[1]
Out[8]= 77
In[9]:= H[x_, y_ /; ! ValueQ[y], z_ /; ! ValueQ[z]] :=
Module[{a = 77, b = 72, c}, c = a + b; y = c*x;
z = a*x^2; (a^2 + b^2)*x]; H[3, m, n]
Out[9]= 33339
In[10]:= {m, n}
Out[10]= {447, 693}
Depending on the algorithm logic realized by a procedure
body, the procedure allows the use of several Return functions
that return results of the procedure (in general, the exit from the
procedure) at the required algorithm points. In principle, the use
of Return[] is allowed even in the list of local variables (starting
values) as illustrates the following example:
In[27]:= B[x_, y_] := Module[{a = If[x < 10 && y > 10, x*y,
Return[{x, y}]], b = 5, c = 7}, a*b*c]: B[5, 15]
Out[27]= 2625
In[28]:= B[15, 15]
Out[28]= {525, 525}
Whereas the third case can be used for returning of some
additional results of the procedure call (values of local variables,
86
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
intermediate evaluations, etc). In the present book and in [1-15] a
number of examples of such approach has been illustrated. At
that, formal arguments in heading of a procedure thru that it is
planned to return results has to be of the form {g_, g__, g___}
(i.e. without a testing Testg function) and be indefinite symbols on
which ValueQ[g] call returns False, or be coded in the form g_/;
!ValueQ[g]. For practical reasons, it is recommended to use the
latter option to return the result thru formal g argument so as
not to introduce unpredictability into the results of the current
session: so, in a case of simple definite g variable the erroneous
situation arises in attempt of assignment of value for g in the
procedure while for g variable as a heading name in the current
session arises the multiplicity of definitions for it as illustrates a
rather simple fragment:
In[3]:= y[t_] := t^2; z[t_] := Module[{}, t^3]
In[4]:= H[x_, y_, z_] := Module[{}, y = x^2; z = x^3; x + 5];
H[3, y, z]
Out[4]= 8
In[5]:= Definition[y]
Out[5]= y = 9
y[t_] := t^2
In[6]:= Definition[z]
Out[6]= z = 27
z[t_] := Module[{}, t^3]
In[7]:= Clear[y, z]; {y, z} = {72, 77}; H[3, y, z]
Set::setraw: Cannot assign to raw object 72.
Set::setraw: Cannot assign to raw object 77.
Out[7]= 8
Note that it is possible to use a mechanism represented by
a fairly clear example to return intermediate results through the
selected formal arguments with {__, ___} patterns:
In[2233]:= V[x_, y__] := Module[{a = 5, b = 7, c = {y}},
If[Length[c] >= 2, ToExpression[ToString[c[[1]]] <> "=77"];
ToExpression[ToString[c[[2]]] <> "=72"],
ToExpression[ToString[c[[1]]] <> "=52"]]; (a + b)*x]
In[2234]:= Clear[b, c]; V[5, b, c]
87
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
Out[2234]= 60
In[2235]:= {b, c}
Out[2235]= {77, 72}
Further is being often mentioned about return of result of a
function or a procedure as unevaluated that concerns both the
standard built–in tools, and the user tools. In any case, the call
of a procedure or a function on an inadmissible tuple of actual
arguments is returned by unevaluated, except for the standard
simplifications of the actual arguments. In this connection the
UnevaluatedQ function providing testing of a procedure or a
function regarding of the return of its call as unevaluated on a
concrete tuple of actual arguments has been programmed. The
function call UnevaluatedQ[F, x] returns True if the call F[x] will
be returned unevaluated, and False otherwise; on an erroneous
call F[x] "ErrorInNumArgs" is returned. The fragment presents
source code of UnevaluatedQ function with examples of its use.
In[46]:= UnevaluatedQ[F_, x___] := If[! SymbolQ[F], True,
ToString1[F[x]] === ToString[F] <> "[" <>
StringTake[ToString1[{x}], {2, -2}] <> "]"]
In[47]:= Sin[1, 2]
Sin::argx: Sin called with 2 arguments; 1 argument is expected
Out[47]= Sin[1, 2]
In[48]:= UnevaluatedQ[Sin, 77, 72]
Out[48]= "ErrorInArgs"
In[49]:= G[x_Integer, y_String] := y <> ToString[x]
In[50]:= UnevaluatedQ[G, 77, 72]
Out[50]= True
The procedure presents an interest for program processing
of the results of procedures and functions calls. The procedure
was used by a number of means from our package [16].
As the results of exits from procedures, it is appropriate to
consider also the various kinds of messages generated by the
procedures as a result of erroneous and exceptional situations
(generated both by the system and programmed in the procedures). At
the same time the issue of program processing of such messages
is of a particular interest. In particular, the problem is solved by
88
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
the procedure whose call MessagesOut[x] returns the message
generated by a procedure or function G whose call given in the
format x = "G[z]". Whereas the procedure call MessagesOut[x,y]
with the 2nd optional y argument – an indefinite symbol – thru it
returns the messages in the format {MessageName, "Message"}. In
the absence of any messages the empty list, i.e. {}, is returned.
An unsuccessful procedure call returns $Failed.
All messages assigned to a symbol x (Function,Module,Block)
along with its usage (if any) are returned by calling Messages[x].
Meantime, the returned result is not very convenient for further
processing in program mode. Therefore, we have created some
useful tools for this purpose [1-16]. In particular, the procedure
call Usage[x] in the string format returns the usage ascribed to
a symbol x (built–in or user tool), its source code and application
examples are represented below, namely:
In[3107]:= Usage[x_Symbol] := Module[{a, b = Context[x],
c = ToString[x]}, ToExpression["?" <> c];
a = ToExpression[StringJoin["Messages[", b, c, "]"]];
If[a == {}, {}, b = StringSplit[ToString[a], "HoldPattern"];
b = Select[b, ! StringFreeQ[#, c <> "::usage"] &];
b = Flatten[StringSplit[b, " :> "]][[2]];
If[SystemQ[x], StringDrop[b, –3], StringTrim[b, "}"]]]]
In[3108]:= Usage[ProcQ]
Out[3108]= "The call ProcQ[x] returns True if x is a
procedure and False otherwise."
In[3109]:= Usage[While]
Out[3109]= "While[test, body] evaluates test, then body,
repetitively, until test first fails to give True."
In[3110]:= Usage[Agn]
Out[3110]= {}
In this context, a simple procedure can be noted whose call
ToFile[x, 1] in the current session opens a file x to read, to that
the system along with the screen writes all messages that occur.
Whereas call ToFile[x, 1, z] with the third optional argument z
(an arbitrary expression) closes the x file, allowing in future to do
analysis of the received messages.
89
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
In[42]:= ToFile[x_String, y_ /; MemberQ[{1, 2}, y], z___] :=
Module[{a, b}, If[{z} == {}, b = OpenWrite[x]; Write["#", b];
Close["#"]; If[y == 1, $Messages = Append[$Messages, b],
$Output = Append[$Output, b]];, $Output =
ReplaceAll[$Output, Read["#"] –> Nothing]; Close["#"];
$Messages = ReplaceAll[$Messages, Read["#"] –> Nothing];
Close[x]; Quiet[DeleteFile[Close["#"]]; ]]]
In[43]:= MessageFile["C:\\temp\\Error.txt", 1]
======================================
In[145]:= MessageFile["C:\\temp\\ Error.txt", 1, 7]
Out[145]= "C:\\temp\\Error.txt"
Moreover, the procedure calls with the second argument 2
are performed similarly, except that all messages output by the
Print function are written to the w file until appear a procedure
call with the third argument z (an arbitrary expression).
Right there appropriate to note the Print1 procedure which
extends the capabilities of the built–in Print function, allowing
additionally to output to the file the result of a call of the Print
function. The call Print1[x, y, z] prints z as output additionally
saving the z expression in the x file if y = 1 or closing the x file if
y=2. A simple function IsOpenFile can be used in the procedure
implementation, whose call IsOpenFile[x] returns True if a file x
exists and is open for writing, and False otherwise.
In[2228]:= Print1[x_, y_ /; MemberQ[{1, 2}, y], z___] :=
Module[{a}, If[FileExistsQ[x], If[y == 1, Print[z], Close[x];
$Output = ReplaceAll[$Output, Read["#"] –> Nothing];
DeleteFile[Close["#"]]], a = OpenWrite[x]; Write["#", a];
Close["#"]; $Output = Append[$Output, a]; Print[z]]]
In[2229]:= IsOpenFile[x_ /; StringQ[x]] := ! StringFreeQ[
StringReplace[ToString[InputForm[Streams[]]],
"\\\\" –> "\\"], StringJoin["OutputStream[\"", x, "\","]]
In[2230]:= IsOpenFile["c:/print2.txt"]
Out[2230]= False
The following procedure generalizes the previous function
for testing of openness of files on reading and writing. Namely,
90
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
the procedure call IsInOutFile[x] returns False if a file x is closed
or missing, whereas the list {True, In, Out}, {True, In}, {True, Out}
otherwise, where In – the file for reading and Out – for writing.
In[3242]:= IsInOutFile[x_ /; StringQ[x]] := Module[{a =
StringReplace[ToString[InputForm[Streams[]]],"\\\\"->"\\"]},
If[! StringFreeQ[a, StringJoin["OutputStream[\"", x, "\","]] &&
! StringFreeQ[a, StringJoin["InputStream[\"", x, "\","]],
{True, In, Out},
If[! StringFreeQ[a, StringJoin["OutputStream[\"", x, "\","]],
{True, Out},
If[! StringFreeQ[a, StringJoin["InputStream[\"", x, "\","]],
{True, In}, False]]]]
In[3243]:= IsInOutFile["C:\\temp/Cinema_2019.doc"]
Out[3243]= {True, In}
However, note that (as shown in [1-15]) the coding of the file
path is symbolic–dependent, for example, path "с:/tmp/kino" is
not identical to "C:/Tmp\\Kino" i.e. the system will recognize
them as different paths. This should be taken into account when
programming file access tools. It is useful to use standardized
datafiles path view as an easy approach [1-15].
Therefore, the output of messages, including Print function
messages, can be ascribed fully to the return of results allowing
further program processing along with their rendering on the
display. Naturally, all procedure calls that complete by $Failed
or $Aborted are processed programmatically. To recognize this
return type it is possible to use the system function whose call
FailureQ[x] returns True if x is equal to $Failed or $Aborted.
For more successful and flexible program processing of the
main possible erroneous and exception situations that may occur
in the procedure execution (Block, Module), it is recommended
that the messages processing about them be programmed in the
procedure, making it more reliable and steady against mistakes.
It should be noted that our tools for processing procedures
and functions are oriented to the absence of attributes for them.
Otherwise, the tools should be adapted to existence of attributes
for the means being processed, which is easy to do.
91
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
2.6. Tools for testing of procedures and functions
Having defined procedures of two types (Module and Block)
and functions, including pure functions, at the same time we
have no standard tools for identification of objects of the given
types. In this regard we created a series of means that allow to
identify objects of the specified types. In the present section
non–standard means for testing of procedural and functional
objects are considered. In addition, it should be noted that the
Mathematica – a rather closed system in contradistinction, for
example, to its main competitor – the Maple system in which it
is admissible to browse of source codes of its software which is
located both in the main and in the auxiliary libraries. Whereas
the Mathematica has no similar opportunity. In this connection
the means presented below concerns only to the user functions
and procedures loaded into the current session from a package
(m– or mx–file), or a document (nb–file; also may contain a package)
and activated in it.
For testing of objects onto procedural type we proposed a
number of means among which it is possible to mark out such
as ProcQ, ProcQ1, ProcQ2. The procedure call ProcQ[x] provides
testing of an object x be as a procedural object {"Module","Block"},
returning accordingly True or False; while the ProcQ1 procedure
is a useful enough modification of the ProcQ procedure, its call
ProcQ1[x,t] returns True, if x – an object of the type Block, Module
or DynamicModule, and "Others" or False otherwise; at that, the
type of x object is returned through the factual t argument – an
indefinite variable. The source codes of the above procedures,
their description along with the most typical examples of their
application are presented in our books and in our MathToolBox
package [12-16]. A number of receptions used at their creation
can be useful enough in the practical programming. The ProcQ
procedure is an quite fast, processes attributes and options, but
has certain restrictions, first of all, in a case of multiple objects
of the same name. The fragment below represents source code
the ProcQ procedure along with typical examples of its use.
92
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
In[7]:= ProcQ[x_] := Module[{a, atr = Quiet[Attributes[x]], b,
c, d, h}, If[! SymbolQ[x], False, If[SystemQ[x], False,
If[UnevaluatedQ[Definition2, x], False,
If[ListQ[atr] && atr != {}, ClearAllAttributes[x]];
a = StringReplace[ToString[InputForm[Definition[x]]],
Context[x] <> ToString[x] <> "`" –> ""];
Quiet[b = StringTake[a, {1, First[First[StringPosition[a,
{" := Block[{", " :=Block[{"}] – 1]]}];
c = StringTake[a, {1, First[First[StringPosition[a,
{" := Module[{", " :=Module[{"}] – 1]]}];
d = StringTake[a, {1, First[First[StringPosition[a,
{" := DynamicModule[{", " :=DynamicModule[{"}] – 1]]}]];
If[b === ToString[HeadPF[x]], SetAttributes[x, atr]; True,
If[c === ToString[HeadPF[x]], SetAttributes[x, atr]; True,
If[d === ToString[HeadPF[x]], SetAttributes[x, atr]; True,
SetAttributes[x, atr]; False]]]]]]]
In[8]:= Map[ProcQ, {Sin, a + b, ProcQ1, ProcQ, 77, ToString1}]
Out[8]= {False, False, True, True, False, True}
Generally, supposing existence of procedures of the above
two types (Module and Block) in the Mathematica, for ensuring
of the reliability it is recommended to use the procedures of the
Module type. From examples represented in [8,10-15] follows, if
local variables of a modular object aren't crossed with domain
of values of the variables of the same name which are external
in relation to it, the absolutely other picture takes place in a case
with the local variables of a block object, namely: if initial values
or values are ascribed to all local variables of such object in its body,
they save effect in the object body; those variables of an object to which
such values weren't ascribed accept values of the variables of the same
name which are the external in relation to the block object. So, at the
listed conditions the modular and block objects relative to the
local variables (and in general as procedural objects) can quite be
considered as equivalent. Naturally, the told remains in force
also for block objects with empty lists of the local variables. The
specified reasons were used as a basis for the programming of
the RealProcQ procedure presented by the following fragment.
93
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
In[2107]:= RealProcQ[x_ /; BlockModQ[x]] := Module[{a, b, c},
If[ModuleQ[x], True,
a = StringJoin[Insert[Reverse[Headings[x]], " := ", 2]] <> "[";
b = StringReplace[PureDefinition[x], a –> "", 1];
Do[c = StringTake[b, k]; If[SyntaxQ[c], Return[c], 7],
{k, StringLength[b]}];
If[c == "{}", {}, c = StrToList[StringTake[c, {2, –2}]]];
c = Map[StringSplit[#, " = "] &, c];
AllTrue[Map[If[Length[#] > 1, True, False] &, c], TrueQ]]]
In[2108]:= B[x_] := Block[{a = 90, b = 50, c = {72, 77}, d = 42},
x*(a*b*c*d)]; RealProcQ[B]
Out[2108]= True
In[2109]:= M[x_] := Block[{a = 90, b = 49, c, h}, h = 77; x*h];
In[2110]:= RealProcQ[M]
Out[2110]= False
Experience of use of the RealProcQ procedure confirmed its
efficiency at testing objects of the type Block that are considered
as real procedures. At that, we will understand an object of the
type {Module, Block} as a real procedure that in the Mathematica
software is functionally equivalent to a Module, i.e. is a certain
procedure in its classical understanding. The call RealProcQ[x]
returns True if a symbol x defines a Module, or a Block which is
equivalent to a Module, and False otherwise. In addition, it is
supposed that a certain block is equivalent to a module if it has
no the local variables or all its local variables have initial values
or some local variables have initial values, while others obtain
values by means of the operator "=" in the block body. From all
our means solving the testing problem for procedural objects,
the RealProcQ procedure with the greatest possible reliability
identifies the set procedure in its classical understanding; thus,
the real procedure can be of the type {Module, Block}.
In the context of providing of an object of the type {Module,
Block} to be a real procedure recognized by the testing RealProcQ
procedure, the ToRealProc procedure is of certain interest whose
call ToRealProc[x, y] returns nothing, converting a module or a
block x into the object of the same type and of the same name
with the empty list of local variables that are placed in the object
94
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
body at once behind the empty list of the local variables. At the
same time all local variables of an object x are replaced with the
symbols, unique in the current session, which are generated by
means of the Unique function. In addition, along with a certain
specified purpose the returned procedure provides a possibility
of more effective debugging in interactive mode of procedure,
allowing to do dynamic control of change of values of its local
variables in the procedure run on concretefactual arguments. In
addition to our means for testing of procedural objects, we can
note a simple procedure, whose call UprocQ[x] returns False if
an object x isn’t a procedure or is an object of the same name [8].
Meanwhile, since the structural definitions of modules and
blocks are identical, the ToRealProc1 procedure that is based on
this circumstance, has a simple implementation. The following
fragment represents source code of the ToRealProc1 procedure
with examples of its application.
In[2229]:= B[x_] := Block[{a = 7, b, c = 8, d}, x*a*b*c*d];
In[2230]:= SetAttributes[B, {Protected, Listable, Orderless}]
In[2231]:= ToRealProc1[x_] := Module[{a = Attributes[x]},
If[ModuleQ[x], x, If[BlockQ[x],
If[FreeQ[a, Protected], 7, Unprotect[x]];
ToExpression[StringReplace[Definition2[x][[1]],
":= Block[{" –> ":= Module[{", 1]]; SetAttributes[x, a]; x, $Failed]]]
In[2232]:= ToRealProc1[B]
Out[2232]= B
In[2233]:= Definition[B]
Out[2233]= Attributes[B] = {Flat, Listable, Orderless, Protected}
B[x_] := Module[{a = 7, b, c = 8, d}, x*a*b*c*d]
In[2234]:= ToRealProc1[vsv]
Out[2234]= $Failed
Calling the ToRealProc1[x] procedure returns the module
name that is equivalent to a module x or a block x, retaining all
attributes and structure of the original object x. The scope of the
module created is the current session. As it was noted above, in
general case between procedures of types "Module" and "Block"
exist principal distinctions that do not allow a priori to consider
95
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
a block structure as a procedure in its above meaning. Therefore
the type of a procedure should be chosen rather circumspectly,
giving preference to the procedures of the "Module" type [8,12].
As noted repeatedly, Mathematica does not distinguish the
objects by names, but by headers, allowing objects of the same
name with different headers and even types (modules, functions,
blocks) to exist in the current session. First of all, it is useful to
define the function whose call TypeBFM[x] returns the type of
an object x ("Block","Function", "Module"), or $Failed otherwise.
In[7]:= B[x_] := Block[{a=7, b}, x*a*b]; B[x_, y_] := Module[{a, b},
x/y]; B[x_, y_, z_] := x^2 + y^2 + z^2; G[x_] := Module[{}, x*a]
In[8]:= TypeBFM[x_] := If[ModuleQ[x], "Module",
If[FunctionQ[x], "Function", If[BlockQ[x], "Block", $Failed]]]
In[9]:= TypeBFM[G]
Out[9]= "Module"
In[10]:= TypeQ[x_, y___] := Module[{a, b, c = {}, d = {}, t},
If[! SameQ[Head[x], Symbol], $Failed, a = Definition2[x][[1 ;; –2]];
Map[{b = ToString[Unique[]],
t = StringReplace[#, ToString[x] <> "[" –> b <> "[", 1],
AppendTo[c, b], AppendTo[d, t]} &, a]; Map[ToExpression, d];
Map[ToExpression, c];
If[{y} != {} && SymbolQ[y], b = Map[Headings, c];
y = Map[{#[[1]], StringReplace[#[[2]],
"$" ~~ Shortest[__] ~~ "[" –> ToString[x] <> "["]} &, b];
y = If[Length[y] == 1, Flatten[y], y], 7]; a = Map[TypeBFM, c];
If[Length[a] == 1, a[[1]], a]]]
In[11]:= TypeQ[B]
Out[11]= {"Block", "Module", "Function"}
In[12]:= TypeQ[B, gs]
Out[12]= {"Block", "Module", "Function"}
In[13]:= gs
Out[13]= {{"Block", "B[x_]"}, {"Module", "B[x_, y_]"},
{"Function", "B[x_, y_, z_]"}}
In[14]:= {TypeQ[G, gv], gv}
Out[14]= {"Module", {"Module", "G[x_]"}}
Whereas the TypeQ procedure is primarily intended to test
procedural and functional objects having multiple definitions of
96
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
the same name. Calling TypeQ[w] returns $Failed if w is not a
symbol, whereas on w objects which have multiple definitions
of the same name, the list is returned containing the subobject
types that make up the w object in the form {"Block", "Function",
"Module"}. While the calling TypeQ[w, j] with the 2nd optional
argument j – an indefined symbol – through j additionally returns
the list in which for each subobject of object w corresponds the
2–element list whose first element defines its type, whereas the
2nd element defines its header in the string format. The previous
fragment represents the source code of the TypeQ procedure and
typical examples of its application.
Meanwhile, procedures, being generally objects other than
functions, allow relatively simply conversion of functions into
procedures, whereas under certain assumptions it is possible to
convert procedures into functions too. Particularly, on example
of the modular objects consider a principal scheme for this type
of conversion algorithm that is based on the list structure.
Heading := {Save2[f, {locals, args}], Map[Clear, {locals, args}],
{locals}, Procedure body, {Get[f], DeleteFile[f]}}[[–2]]
An algorithm of the ProcToFunc procedure, the original text
of which together with examples of applications, is represented
below, is based on the above scheme. The list view of a module
is generated in the format containing the following components:
Heading – the module or block heading;
Save2[f, {locals, args}] – saving of values of the joint list of local
variable names without initial values and arguments without testing
functions in a file f;
Map[Clear, {locals, args}] – clearing of the above arguments and
local variables in the current session;
{locals} – the list of local variables with initial values, if any;
Procedure body – body of module or block;
{Get[f], DeleteFile[f]} – loading the f file to the current session,
which contains the values of local variable names and arguments that
were previously stored in it.
With in mind the told, the procedure call ProcToFunc[j] does
not return anything, converting a module or block j into a list
97
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
format function of the same name with preserving of attributes
of the module or block. The following fragment represents the
source code of the procedure with examples of its application.
In[42]:= ProcToFunc[j_ /; ProcQ[j]] := Module[{a, b, c, d, p},
a = Map[ToString[#] <> "@" &, Args[j]];
a = Map[StringReplace[#, "_" ~~ ___ ~~ "@" –> ""] &, a];
If[ModuleQ[j], b = Map[#[[1]] &, Locals4[j]]; c = Join[a, b];
d = Definition2[j][[1]]; d = StringReplace[d, "Module[" –>
"{Save2[\"##\"," <> ToString1[c] <> "], Map[Clear, " <>
ToString1[c] <> "],", 1]; d = StringReplacePart[d, "", {–1, –1}];
d = d <> ", {Get[\"##\"], DeleteFile[\"##\"]}}[[–2]]";
If[FreeQ[Attributes[j], Protected], ToExpression[d],
Unprotect[j]; ToExpression[d]; SetAttributes[j, Protected]],
b = Map[#[[1]] &, Locals4[j]]; c = Join[a, b];
p = Map[If[Length[#] != 1, #[[1]], Nothing] &, Locals4[j]];
p = Join[a, p]; d = Definition2[j][[1]];
d = StringReplace[d, "Block[" –>
"{Save2[\"##\"," <> ToString1[c] <> "], Map[Clear, " <>
ToString1[p] <> "],", 1]; d = StringReplacePart[d, "", {–1, –1}];
d = d <> ", {Get[\"##\"], DeleteFile[\"##\"]}}[[–2]]";
If[FreeQ[Attributes[j], Protected], ToExpression[d],
Unprotect[j]; ToExpression[d]; SetAttributes[j, Protected]]]]
In[43]:= {a, b, c, x, y} = {1, 2, 3, 4, 5};
In[44]:= M[x_ /; IntegerQ[x], y_] := Module[{a = 5, b = 7, c},
a = a*x + b*y; c = a*b/(x + y); If[x*y > 100, a, c]]
In[45]:= SetAttributes[M, {Protected, Listable, Flat}]
In[46]:= ProcToFunc[M]
In[47]:= Definition[M]
Out[47]= Attributes[M] = {Flat, Listable, Protected}
M[x_/; IntegerQ[x], y_] := {Save2["##", {"x", "y", "a", "b", "c"}],
Clear /@ {"x", "y", "a", "b", "c"}, {a = 5, b = 7, c},
a = a*x + b*y; c = (a*b)/(x + y);
If[x*y > 100, a, c], {<< "##", DeleteFile["##"]}}[[–2]]
In[48]:= M[77, 72]
Out[48]= 889
98
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
In[49]:= {a, b, c, x, y}
Out[49]= {1, 2, 3, 4, 5}
In[50]:= B[x_, y_] := Block[{a = 5, b, c = 7}, a*x + b*c*y]
In[51]:= {a, b, c} = {72, 77, 67};
In[52]:= ProcToFunc[B]
In[53]:= Definition[B]
Out[53]= B[x_, y_] := {Save2["##", {"x", "y", "a", "b", "c"}],
Clear /@ {"x", "y", "a", "c"}, {a = 5, b, c = 7},
a*x + b*c*y, {<< "##", DeleteFile["##"]}}[[–2]]
In[54]:= B[42, 47]
Out[54]= 25543
In[55]:= {a, b, c}
Out[55]= {72, 77, 67}
Meantime, a module or block that is converted to a function
must satisfy some of the conditions resulting from the inability
to use certain built-in functions, such as Return, in Input mode.
Whereas Goto and Label are quite permissible, for example:
In[8]:= f[x_] := {n = x; Label[g]; n++; If[n < 100, Goto[g], n]}; f[5]
Out[8]= {100}
In[9]:= f[x_] := {n = x; Label[g]; n++; If[n < 100, Goto[g], Goto[j]];
Label[j]; n}; f[5]
Out[9]= {100}
As a rule, the primary limitation for such conversion is size
of the procedure's source code, making the function obscure. In
general, the representations of modules and blocks in list format
is in many cases more efficient in time.
Note, that when programming the algorithm of converting
of a block into function, it should be taken into account that due
to the specifics of the local variables in the blocks (as opposed to
the modules), the function should save in a file the values of all
local variables of the block, while the values of local variables
with initial values of the block are cleared before the block body
is executed when the resulting function is called. For the rest,
the step of completing the resulting function is identical for the
simulation of the block and module. In certain cases the above
convertings can be rather useful.
99
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
2.7. The nested blocks and modules
In Mathematica along with simple procedures that aren't
containing in its body of definitions of other procedures, the
application of the so–called nested procedures, i.e. procedures
whose definitions allow definitions of other procedures in their
body. The nesting level of such procedures is defined by only a
size of work field of the system. Therefore a rather interesting
problem of determination of the list of subprocedures whose
definitions are in the body of an arbitrary procedure of the type
{Block, Module} arises. In this regard the SubProcs ÷ SubProcs3
procedures have been programmed [16] that successfully solve
the problem. Here consider the SubProcs3 procedure whose call
SubProcs3[x] returns the nested two–element list of the ListList
type whose 1st element defines the sublist of headings of blocks
and modules composing a main procedure x, while the second
element defines the sublist of the generated names of the blocks
and modules composing the main procedure x, including itself
procedure x, and that are activated in the current session of the
Mathematica. The next fragment represents source code of the
SubProcs3 procedure with the most typical examples of its use.
In[20]:= G[x_] := Module[{Vg, H77}, Vg[y_] := Module[{}, y^3];
H77[z_] := Module[{}, z^4]; x + Vg[x] + H77[x]];
G[x_, z_] := Module[{Vt, H, P}, Vt[t_] := Module[{}, t^3 + t^2 + 7];
H[t_] := Module[{}, t^4]; P[h_] := Module[{a = 590}, a^2 + h^2];
x + Vt[x] + H[z]*P[x]]; SetAttributes[G, {Protected, Listable}]
In[21]:= SubProcs3[y_, z___] := Module[{u = {}, m = 1, Sv,
v = Flatten[{PureDefinition[y]}]}, If[BlockFuncModQ[y],
Sv[S_String] := Module[{a = ExtrVarsOfStr[S, 1], b, c = {}, d,
t = 2, k = 1, cc = {}, n, p, j,
h = {StringTake[S, {1, Flatten[StringPosition[S, " := "]][[1]] – 1}]}},
a = Select[a, ! SystemQ[Symbol[#]] &&
! MemberQ[{ToString[G]}, #] &];
b = StringPosition[S, Map[" " <> # <> "[" &, a]];
p = Select[a, ! StringFreeQ[S, " " <> # <> "["] &]; b = Flatten[
Map[SubStrSymbolParity1[StringTake[S, {#[[1]], –1}], "[", "]"] &,
b]]; For[j = 1, j <= Length[p], j++, n = p[[j]];
100
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
For[k = 1, k <= Length[b] – 1, k++, d = b[[k]];
If[! StringFreeQ[d, "_"] && StringTake[b[[k + 1]], {1, 1}] == "[",
AppendTo[c, Map[n <> d <> " := " <> # <> b[[k + 1]] &,
{"Block", "Module"}]]]]]; c = DeleteDuplicates[Flatten[c]];
For[k = 1, k <= Length[c], k++, d = c[[k]];
If[! StringFreeQ[S, d], AppendTo[h, d], AppendTo[cc,
StringTake[d, {1, Flatten[StringPosition[d, " := "]][[1]] – 1}]]]];
{h, cc} = Map[DeleteDuplicates, {h, cc}];
p = Map[StringTake[#, {1, Flatten[StringPosition[#, "["]][[1]]}] &, h];
cc = Select[Select[cc, ! SuffPref[#, p, 1] &], ! StringFreeQ[S, #] &];
If[cc == {}, h, For[k = 1, k <= Length[cc], k++, p = cc[[k]];
p = StringCases[S, p <> " := " ~~ __ ~~ "; "];
AppendTo[h, StringTake[p,
{1, Flatten[StringPosition[p, ";"]][[1]] – 1}]]]]; Flatten[h]];
For[m, m <= Length[v], m++, AppendTo[u, Sv[v[[m]]]]];
u = Select[u, ! SameQ[#, Null] &]; u = If[Length[u] == 1, u[[1]], u];
If[{z} != {}, ToExpression[u]]; u, $Failed]]
In[22]:= SubProcs3[G]
Out[22]= {{"G[x_]", "Vg[y_] := Module[{}, y^3]",
"H77[z_] := Module[{}, z^4]"}, {"G[x_, z_]",
"Vt[t_] := Module[{}, t^3 + t^2 + 590]", "H[t_] := Module[{}, t^4]",
"P[h_] := Module[{a = 590}, a^2 + h^2]"}}
The SubProcs3 procedure is a rather useful extension of the
SubProcs ÷ SubProcs2 procedures; its call SubProcs3[x] differs
from a call SubProcs2[x] by the following 2 moments, namely:
(1) the user block, function or module can act as an argument x,
and (2) the returned list as the first element contains heading of
the x object while other elements of the list present definitions
of functions, blocks and modules in string format entering into
the x definition. In a case of the x object of the same name, the
returned list will be the nested list whose sublists have the above
mentioned format. In addition, the call SubProcs3[x, y] with the
second optional y argument – an arbitrary expression – returns the
above list and at the same time activates in the current session
all objects of the above type, which enter into the x. If function
with heading acts as an object x, only its heading is returned;
the similar result takes place and in a case of the x object which
101
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
doesn't contain subobjects of the above type whereas on the x
object different from the user block, function or module, the
call of the SubProcs3 procedure returns $Failed.
In some cases there is a necessity of definition for a module
or block of the subobjects of the type {Block, Function, Module}.
The procedure call SubsProcQ[x, y] returns True if y is a global
active subobject of an object x of the above-mentioned type, and
False otherwise. However, as the Math objects of this type differ
not by names as that is accepted in the majority of programming
systems, but by headings then thru the third optional argument
the procedure call returns the nested list whose sublists as first
element contain headings with a name x, whereas the second
element contain the headings of subobjects corresponding to
them with y name. On the 1st two arguments {x, y} of the types,
different from given in a procedure heading, the procedure call
SubsProcQ[x, y] returns False. The fragment below represents
source code of the SubsProcQ procedure along with an example
of its typical application.
In[7]:= SubsProcQ[x_, y_, z___] := Module[{a, b, k=1, j=1, Res = {}},
If[BlockModQ[x] && BlockFuncModQ[y],
{a, b} = Map[Flatten, {{Definition4[ToString[x]]},
Definition4[ToString[y]]}}];
For[k, k <= Length[b], k++, For[j, j <= Length[a], j++,
If[! StringFreeQ[a[[j]], b[[k]]], AppendTo[Res, {StringTake[a[[j]],
{1, Flatten[StringPosition[a[[j]], " := "]][[1]] – 1}],
StringTake[b[[k]], {1, Flatten[StringPosition[b[[k]]," := "]][[1]] – 1}]}],
Continue[]]]]; If[Res != {}, If[{z} != {} && ! HowAct[z],
z = If[Length[Res] == 1, Res[[1]], Res]; True], False], False]]
In[8]:= V[x_] := Block[{a, b, c}, a[m_] := m^2; b[n_] := n + Sin[n];
c[p_] := Module[{}, p]; a[x]*b[x]*c[x]]; c[p_] := Module[{}, p];
V[x_, y_] := Module[{a, b, c}, a[m_] := m^2; b[n_] := n + Sin[n];
c[p_] := Module[{}, p]; a[x]*b[x]*c[x]]; c[p_] := Module[{}, p]; p[x_] := x
In[9]:= {SubsProcQ[V, c, g72], g72}
Out[9]= {True, {{"V[x_]", "c[p_]"}, {"V[x_, y_]", "c[p_]"}}}
Except the means considered in books [8-15], a number of
means for operating with subprocedures is presented, here we
will represent an useful SubsProcs procedure that analyzes the
blocks and modules regarding presence in their definitions of
102
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
subobjects of type {Block, Module}. The call SubsProcs[x] returns
generally the nested list of definitions in the string format of all
subobjects of type {Block, Module} whose definitions are in the
body of an object x of type {Block, Module}. In addition, the first
sublist determines subobjects of Module type, the second sublist
defines subobjects of the Block type. In the presence of only one
sublist the simple list is returned whereas in the presence of the
1–element simple list its element is returned. In a case of lack of
subobjects of the above type, the call SubsProcs[x] returns the
empty list, i.e. {} whereas on an object x, different from Block or
Module, the call SubsProcs[x] is returned unevaluated. Fragment
represents source code of the SubsProcs procedure and a typical
example of its application.
In[1125]:= P[x_, y_] := Module[{Art, Kr, Gs, Vg, a},
Art[c_, d_] := Module[{b}, c + d]; Kr[n_] := Module[{}, n^2];
Vg[h_] := Block[{p = 90}, h^3 + p]; Gs[z_] := Module[{}, x^3];
a = Art[x, y] + Kr[x*y]*Gs[x + y] + Vg[x*y]]
In[1126]:= SubsProcs[x_/; BlockModQ[x]] := Module[{d, s = {}, g,
k = 1, p, h = "", v = 1, R = {}, Res = {}, a = PureDefinition[x], j,
m = 1, n = 0, b = {" := Module[{", " := Block[{"}, c = ProcBody[x]},
For[v, v <= 2, v++, If[StringFreeQ[c, b[[v]]], Break[],
d = StringPosition[c, b[[v]]]];
For[k, k <= Length[d], k++, j = d[[k]][[2]];
While[m != n, p = StringTake[c, {j, j}];
If[p == "[", m++; h = h <> p, If[p == "]", n++; h = h <> p,
h = h <> p]]; j++]; AppendTo[Res, h]; m = 1; n = 0; h = ""];
Res = Map10[StringJoin, If[v == 1, " := Module[", " := Block["],
Res]; g = Res; {Res, m, n, h} = {{}, 1, 0, "]"};
For[k = 1, k <= Length[d], k++, j = d[[k]][[1]] – 2;
While[m != n, p = StringTake[c, {j, j}];
If[p == "]", m++; h = p <> h,
If[p == "[", n++; h = p <> h, h = p <> h]]; j ––];
AppendTo[Res, h]; s = Append[s, j]; m = 1; n = 0; h = "]"];
Res = Map9[StringJoin, Res, g]; {g, h} = {Res, ""}; Res = {};
For[k = 1, k <= Length[s], k++,
For[j = s[[k]], j >= 1, j ––, p = StringTake[c, {j, j}];
If[p == " ", Break[], h = p <> h]]; AppendTo[Res, h]; h = ""];
103
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
AppendTo[R, Map9[StringJoin, Res, g]];
{Res, m, n, k, h, s} = {{}, 1, 0, 1, "", {}}];
R = If[Length[R] == 2, R, Flatten[R]]; If[Length[R] == 1, R[[1]], R]]
In[1127]:= SubsProcs[P]
Out[1127]= {{"Art[c_, d_] := Module[{b}, c + d]",
"Kr[n_] := Module[{}, n^2]", "Gs[z_] := Module[{}, x^3]"},
{"Vg[h_] := Block[{p = 90}, h^3 + p]"}}
The SubsProcs procedure can be rather simply expanded,
in particular, for definition of the nesting levels of subprocedures,
and also onto unnamed subprocedures. Moreover, in connection
with the problem of nesting of the blocks and modules essential
enough distinction between definitions of the nested procedures
in the Maple and Mathematica takes place. So, in the Maple the
definitions of the subprocedures allow to use the lists of formal
arguments identical with the main procedure containing them,
while in the Mathematica similar combination is inadmissible,
causing in the course of evaluation of determination of the main
procedure erroneous situations [4-12]. Generally speaking, the
given circumstance causes certain inconveniences, demanding
a special attentiveness in the process of programming of the
nested procedures. In a certain measure the similar situation
arises and in a case of crossing of lists of formal arguments of
the main procedure and the local variables of its subprocedures
whereas that is quite admissible in the Maple [8,22-41]. In this
context the SubsProcs procedure can be applied successfully to
procedures containing subprocedures of the type {Block, Module}
on condition of nonempty crossing of list of formal arguments
of the main procedure along with the list of local variables of its
subprocedures (see also books on the Maple and Mathematica in
our collections of works [6,14,15]). There you can also familiarize
yourself with examples of nested procedures, useful in practical
programming of various problems.
In principle, on the basis of the above tools it is possible to
programm a number of useful enough tools of operating with
expressions using the nested objects of type Block and Module.
Some from them can be found in [15,16].
104
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
Chapter 3: Programming tools of the user procedure body
So far, we have considered mainly questions of the external
design of any procedure, practically without touching upon the
questions of its internal content – the body of the procedure that
in the definition of procedure (module, block) is located between
the list (may be empty) of local variables and the closing bracket "]".
The basic components of the tools used to program the body of
user procedures are discussed below. To describe an arbitrary
computational algorithm of structures that are based on purely
sequential operations, completely insufficient means for control
the computing process. The modern structural programming
focuses on one of the most error–prone factors: program logic
and includes 3 main сomponents, i.e. top–down engineering,
modular programming and structural coding. In addition, the
first two components are discussed in sufficient detail in [3,15].
We will briefly focus here only on the third component.
The purpose of structural coding is to obtain the correct
program (module) based on simple control structures. Control
structures of sequence, branching, organization of cycles and
function calls are selected as such basic structures (procedures,
programmes). Note here that all said structures allow only one
input and one output. At the same time, the first of 3 specified
control structures (consecution, branching and cycle organization)
make the minimum basis, on the basis of which it is possible to
create a correct program of any complexity with one input, one
output, without cycles and unattainable commands. Detailed
discussion of the bases of control programming structures can
be found, in particular, in [15] and in other available literature
on the basics of modern programming.
Consecution reflects the principle of consistent running of
the proposals of either or another program until some proposal
changing the sequence occurs. For example, a typical sequence
control structure is a sequence of simple assignment sentences
in a particular programming language. Branching characterizes
choosing one of all possible paths for next calculations; typical
105
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
offers providing this control structure are offers of "if A then B
else C" format.
"Cycle" structure performs a repeat execution of the offers
as long as the some logical condition is true; typical offers that
provide this control structure, offers of Do, Do_while, Do_until
are. Basic structures define, respectively, sequential (following),
conditional (branching) and iterative (loop) control transfer in
programs [15]. It is shown, that any correct structured program
theoretically of any complexity can be written only with using
of control sequential structures, While–cycles and if–branching
offers. Meantime, the extension of the set of specified tools in
primarily by providing function calls along with mechanism of
procedures can make programming very easy without breaking
the structure programmes with increasing their modularity and
robustness.
At the same time, combinations (iterations, attachments) of
correct structured programs obtained on a basis of the specified
control structure do not violate the principle of their degree of
structure and correctness. Thus, the program of an arbitrary
complexity and size can be obtained on a basis of an appropriate
combination of extended basis (function calls, cycle, consecution,
procedure mechanism and branching) of control structures. This
approach allows to eliminate the use of labels and unconditional
transitions in programs. The structure of such programs can be
clearly traced from the beginning (top) to the end (down) in the
absence of control transfers to the upper layers. So, exactly in
light of this, it is languages of this type that represent a rather
convenient linguistic support in the development of effective
structured programs, combining the best traditions of modularstructural technology, that in this case is oriented towards the
mathematical field of applications and is sufficient large number
of programmatically unprofessional users from a range of the
application fields, including not entirely mathematical focus.
In the following, the "sentence" or "offer" of Math–language
means the construction of the following simple form, namely:
Math–expression ";" where any correct Mathematica language
106
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
expression is allowed. Sentences are coded one after the other,
each in a single string or multiple in one string; they in general
are ended with separators ";", are processed strictly sequentially
if the control structures of branching or loop do not define of a
different order. The most widely used definition of a sentence
of assignment is based on the operator "=" or ":=" accordingly
of an immediate or delayed assignment which allow multiple
assignments on a basis of list structure, namely:
{a, b, c, d, …}{=|:=}{m, n, p, k, …}
The basic difference between these formats consists in that
the value g is evaluated at the time when expression g=a will be
coded. On the other hand, a value g is not evaluated when the
assignment g:=a is made, but is instead evaluated each time the
value of g is requested. However, in some cases, computational
constructs do not allow these formats to be used, in which case
the following system built-in functions can be successfully used
accordingly: Set[g,a] is equivalent of "g=a" and SetDelayed[g,a]
is equivalent of "g:=a". So, in the list structure, the elements can
be both comma-separated expressions and semicolon-separated
sentences, for example:
In[2226]:= {g[t_] := t, s[t_] := t^2, v[t_] := t^3};
In[2227]:= Map[#[5] &, {g, s, v}]
Out[2227]= {5, 25, 125}
In[2228]:= Clear[g, s, v]
In[2229]:= {g[t_] := t; s[t_] := t^2; v[t_] := t^3};
In[2230]:= Map[#[5] &, {g, s, v}]
Out[2230]= {5, 25, 125}
Particularly at procedures writing the necessity to modify
the value of a particular variable repeatedly often arises. The
Mathematica provides special notations for modification of the
variables values, and for some other often used situations. Let
us give a summary of such notations:
k++
– increment the value of k by 1
k––
– decrement the value of k by 1
++k
– pre–increment value of k by 1
107
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
––k
– pre–decrement value of k by 1
k+=h
– add h to the value of k
k–=h
– subtract h from k
x*=h
– multiply x by h
x/=h
– divide x by h
PrependTo[g, e]
– prepend e to a list g
AppendTo[g, e]
– append e to a list g
Let us give examples for all these cases, namely:
In[2230]:= k = 77; k++; k
Out[2230]= 78
In[2231]:= k = 77; k––; k
Out[2231]= 76
In[2232]:= k = 77; ++k; k
Out[2232]= 78
In[2233]:= k = 77; ––k; k
Out[2233]= 76
In[2234]:= k = 77; h = 7; k += h; k
Out[2234]= 84
In[2235]:= k = 77; h = 7; k –= h; k
Out[2235]= 70
In[2236]:= k = 77; h = 7; k *= h; k
Out[2236]= 539
In[2237]:= k = 77; h = 7; k /= h; k
Out[2237]= 11
In[2238]:= g = {a, b, c, d, e, h}; AppendTo[g, m]; g
Out[2238]= {a, b, c, d, e, h, m}
In[2239]:= g = {a, b, c, d, e, h}; PrependTo[g, m]; g
Out[2239]= {m, a, b, c, d, e, h}
Typically, a considerable or large part of a procedure body
consists of sequential structures, i.e. blocks from sequences of
assignment sentences of different types, possibly involving calls
to built–in and user functions. In principle, the most of bodies
of procedures can be implemented in the form of a sequential
structure, excluding cycles. True, such organization can results
in voluminous codes, so the following control structures are of
particular interest, namely branching structures and cycles.
108
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
3.1. Branching control structures in Mathematica
Conditional branching structures. Complex computation
algorithms and/or control (first of all) cannot has with a purely
sequential scheme, however include various constructions that
change the sequential order of the algorithm depending on the
occurrence of certain conditions: conditional and unconditional
transitions, loops and branching (structure of such type is called
control one). Thus, for the organization of control structures of
branching type the Mathematica system has a number of tools
provided by so-called If-offer, having the following two coding
formats, namely:
If[CE, a, b] – returns a, if conditional expression CE gives True,
and b if conditional expression CE gives False;
If[CE, a, b, c] – returns a, if conditional expression CE gives True,
b if expression CE gives False and c if expression CE gives to neither
True nor False.
The meaning of the first format of If sentence is transparent,
being represent in one form or another in many programming
languages. Whereas the second format in the context of other
Mathematica tools is not quite correct, namely. If a Boolean w
expression does not make sense True or False, then If[w, a, b, c]
(by definition) returns c, while call BooleanQ[w] returns False if
an expression w does not equal neither True nor False and a call
If[BooleanQ[w],a,b,c] will return b, defining a certain dissonance,
which illustrates the following rather simple example:
In[3336]:= If[77, a, b, c]
Out[3336]= c
In[3337]:= If[BooleanQ[77], a, b, c]
Out[3337]= b
In[3338]:= BooleanQ[77]
Out[3338]= False
In our view, in order to resolve such situation, it is enough
useful to define in Mathematica system a Boolean value other
than True and False, similar to the FAIL value in Maple. In the
Maple concept, the FAIL symbol is used by logic to define both
109
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
an unknown and undefined value. At the same time, if it is used
inside Boolean expressions with operators and, or and not, its
behaviour is similar to the case of standard 3–digit logic. Many
Maple procedures and functions, primarily of the testing type,
return the FAIL symbol if they cannot clearly establish the truth
or falsity of a Boolean expression. In addition, the If function
allows an arbitrary level of nesting, whereas as a and b can be
any sequences of valid Mathematica clauses. In the context of
Mathematica syntax, both format of If function can participate
in expressions forming.
The If clause is the most typical tool of providing branching
algorithms. In this context, it should be noted that the if tool of
the Maple language and If of the Mathematica language appear
to be largely equivalent, however in the sense of readability it is
somewhat easier to perceive rather complex branching algorithms
implemented precisely by the if clauses of Maple. It is difficult
to give preference to anyone in this regard.
Thus, the If function ris the most typical tool for ensuring
of the branching algorithms. In this context it should be noted
that If means of the Maple and Mathematica are considerably
equivalent, however readability of difficult enough branching
algorithms realized by means of if offers of the Maple is being
perceived slightly more clearly. So, Maple allows conditional if
offer of the following format, namely:
if l1 then v1 elif l2 then v2 elif l3 then v3 elif l4 then v4 … else vk end
where j–th lj – a logical condition and vj – an expression whose
sense is rather transparent and considered, for example, in [38].
This offer is convenient at programming of a lot of conditional
structures. For definition of a similar structure in Mathematica,
the IFk procedure whose source code with examples of its use
represents the following fragment can be used, namely:
In[3212]:= IFk[x__] := Module[{a = {x}, b, c = "", d = "If[", e = "]",
h = {}, k = 1}, b = Length[a];
If[For[k, k <= b – 1, k++,
AppendTo[h, b >= 2 && ListQ[a[[k]]] && Length[a[[k]]] == 2]];
DeleteDuplicates[h] != {True}, Return[Defer[IFk[x]]], k = 1];
110
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
For[k, k <= b – 1, k++,
c = c <> d <> ToString[a[[k]][[1]]] <> "," <>
ToString[a[[k]][[2]]] <> ","];
c = c <> ToString[a[[b]]] <> StringMultiple[e, b – 1];
ToExpression[c]]
In[3213]:= IFk[{a, b}, {c, d}, {g, s}, {m, n}, {q, p}, h]
Out[3213]= If[a, b, If[c, d, If[g, s, If[m, n, If[q, p, h]]]]]
The call of IFk procedure uses any number of the factual
arguments more than one; the arguments use the two–element
lists of the form {lj, vj}, except the last. Whereas the last factual
argument is a correct expression; in addition, a testing of a lj on
Boolean type isn’t done. The call of IFk procedure on a tuple of
the correct factual arguments returns the result equivalent to
execution of the corresponding Maple offer if.
The IFk1 procedure is an useful extension of the previous
procedure which unlike IFk allows only Boolean expressions as
factual arguments lj, otherwise returning the unevaluated call.
In the rest, the IFk and IFk1 are functionally identical. Thus,
similarly to the Maple offer if, the procedures IFk and IFk1 are
quite useful at programming of the branching algorithms of the
different types. With that said, the above procedures IFk, IFk1
are provided with a quite developed mechanism of testing of
the factual arguments transferred at the procedure call whose
algorithm is easily seen from the source code (see below).
In[7]:= IFk1[x__] := Module[{a = {x}, b, c = "", d = "If[", e = "]",
h = {}, k = 1}, b = Length[a];
If[For[k, k <= b – 1, k++,
AppendTo[h, b >= 2 && ListQ[a[[k]]] && Length[a[[k]]] == 2]];
DeleteDuplicates[h] != {True},
Return[Defer[IFk1[x]]], {h, k} = {{}, 1}];
If[For[k, k <= b – 1, k++, AppendTo[h, a[[k]][[1]]]];
Select[h, ! MemberQ[{True, False}, #] &] != {},
Return[Defer[IFk1[x]]], k = 1];
For[k = 1, k <= b – 1, k++,
c = c <> d <> ToString[a[[k]][[1]]] <> "," <>
ToString[a[[k]][[2]]] <> ","];
c = c <> ToString[a[[b]]] <> StringMultiple[e, b – 1];
ToExpression[c]]
111
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
In[8]:= IFk1[{False, b}, {False, d}, {False, s}, {True, G}, {False, p}, h]
Out[8]= G
Now, using the described approach fairly easy to program
in Math–language an arbitrary Maple construction describing
the branching algorithms [27–41].
In a number of cases the simple Iff procedure with number
of arguments in quantity 1÷n which generalizes the standard If
function is quite useful tool; it is very convenient at number of
arguments, starting with 1, what is rather convenient in those
cases when calls of the Iff function are generated in a certain
procedure automatically, simplifying processing of erroneous
and especial situations arising at the call of such procedure at
number of arguments from range 2..4. The following fragment
represents source code of the Iff procedure with an example. In
addition, it must be kept in mind that all its factual arguments,
since the second, are coded in string format in order to avoid
their premature calculation at the call Iff[x, ...] when the factual
arguments are being evaluated/simplified.
In[1114]:= Iff[x_, y__ /; StringQ[y]] := Module[{a = {x, y}, b},
b = Length[a];
If[b == 1 || b >= 5, Defer[Iff[x, y]],
If[b == 2, If[x, ToExpression[y]],
If[b == 3, If[x, ToExpression[y], ToExpression[a[[3]]]],
If[b == 4, If[x, ToExpression[a[[2]]], ToExpression[a[[3]]],
ToExpression[a[[4]]]], Null]]]]]
In[1115]:= a = {}; For[k = 1, k <= 77, k++, Iff[PrimeQ[k],
"AppendTo[a, k]"]]; a
Out[1115]= {2, 3, 5, 7, 11, 13, 17, 19, 23, 29, 31, 37, 41, 43, 47, 53,
59, 61, 67, 71, 73}
To a certain degree to the If constructions adjoins the Which
function of the following format:
Which[lc1, w1, lc2, w2, lc3, w3, ..., lck, wk]
which returns the result of evaluation of the first wj expression
for which Boolean expression lcj (j = 1..k) accepts True value. If
some of the evaluated conditions lcj doesn't return {True|False}
the function call is returned unevaluated while in a case of False
for all lcj conditions (j = 1..k) the function call returns Null, i.e.
112
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
nothing. At dynamical generation of a Which object the simple
procedure WhichN can be a rather useful that allows any even
number of arguments similar to the Which function, otherwise
returning result unevaluated. In the rest, the WhichN is similar
to the Which function; the following fragment represents source
code of the WhichN procedure with a typical example of its use.
In[47]:= WhichN[x__] := Module[{a = {x}, c = "Which[", d,
k = 1}, d = Length[a]; If[OddQ[d], Defer[WhichN[x]],
ToExpression[For[k, k <= d, k++, c = c <>
ToString[a[[k]]] <> ","]; StringTake[c, {1, –2}] <> "]"]]]
In[48]:= f = 90; WhichN[False, b, f == 90, SV, g, h, r, t]
Out[48]= SV
The above procedures Iff, IFk, IFk1 and Which represent a
quite certain interest at programming a number of applications
of various purpose, first of all, of the system character (similar
tools are considered in our collection [15] and package MathToolBox).
Unconditional transitions. At that, control transfers of the
unconditional type are defined in the language, usually, by the
Goto constructions by which control is transferred to the Label
point of the procedure specified by the corresponding Label. In
Mathematica language, can to usage unconditional transitions
based on the built-in Goto function encoded in the Goto[Label]
format to organize the branching of algorithms along with the
presented If clause. Meanwhile, in a number of cases, the use of
this tool is very effective, in particular when it is necessary to
load in Mathematica software the programs using unconditional
transitions based on Goto offer. Particularly, Fortran programs,
rather common in scientifical applications, are a fairly typical
example. From our experience it should be noted that the use of
Goto function greatly simplified immersion in Mathematica of
Fortran–programs related to engineering and physical direction
which rather widely use Goto–constructions. Note that, unlike
Mathematica, the goto function in Maple only makes sense in
the procedure body, allowing from the goto(Label) call point to
go to a sentence preceded by the specified Label. Meanwhile, in
113
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
Mathematica the Goto function is permissible also outside of
procedures, although that makes little sense. There can be an
arbitrary g expression as a Label, as the following rather simple
fragment illustrates, namely:
In[1900]:= G = {}; p = 1; Label[agn]; AppendTo[G, p++];
If[p <= 10, Goto[agn], G]
Out[1900]= {1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10}
The above fragment illustrates a simple example of cyclic
computations on a basis of Goto function without using built-in
standard loop functions. However, such cyclic constructions (in
the temporary relation) substantially concede to the cycles, for
example, based on the built–in function Do, for example:
In[5]:= p = 0; Timing[Label[g]; If[p++ < 999999, Goto[g], p]]
Out[5]= {1.54441, 1000000}
In[6]:= p = 0; Timing[Do[p++, 1000000]; p]
Out[6]= {0.187201, 1000000}
Time differences are quite noticeable, starting with a cycle
length greater than 4000 steps. However, cyclic constructions
based on the unconditional Goto transition are in some cases
quite effective at programming of the procedure bodies. Note
another point is worth paying attention to, namely. It is known
[20-41] that in Maple, an unconditional goto(Label) transition
assumes a global variable as a Label, whereas the definition of
Label as a local (that not test as an error in the procedure definition
calculation stage) initiates an erroneous situation when calling
the procedure. Whereas the Mathematica in an unconditional
Goto[Label] transition as a Label allows both global variable
and local along with an arbitrary expression, for example:
In[2254]:= Sv[k_Integer] := Module[{p = 0, g}, Label[g];
If[p++ <= k, Goto[g], {g, p}]]
In[2255]:= Sv[10000]
Out[2255]= {g$16657, 10002}
In[2256]:= Sv1[k_Integer, x_] := Module[{p = 0}, Label[x];
If[p++ <= k, Goto[x], {x, p}]]
In[2257]:= Sv1[10000, a*Sin[b] + c*Cos[d]]
Out[2257]= {c*Cos[d] + a*Sin[b], 10002}
114
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
Meanwhile, in order to avoid any misunderstandings, the
Label is recommended to be defined as a local variable because
the global Label calculated outside of a module will be always
acceptable for the module, however calculated in the module
body quite can distort calculations outside of the module. At
that, multiplicity of occurrences of identical Goto functions into
a procedure is a quite naturally and is defined by the realized
algorithm while with the corresponding tags Label the similar
situation, generally speaking, is inadmissible; in addition, it is
not recognized at evaluation of a procedure definition and even
at a stage of its performance, often substantially distorting the
planned task algorithm. In this case only point of the module
body that is marked by the first such Label receives the control.
Moreover, it must be kept in mind that lack of a Label[j] for the
corresponding call Goto[j] in a block or a module at a stage of
evaluation of its definitions isn't recognized, however only at
the time of performance with the real appeal to such Goto[j].
Interesting examples illustrating the told can be found in [6-15].
In this connection the GotoLabel procedure can represent a
quite certain interest whose call GotoLabel[j] allows to analyse
a procedure j on the subject of formal correctness of use of Goto
functions and the Label tags corresponding to them. So, the call
GotoLabel[j] returns the nested 3–element list whose the first
element defines the list of all Goto functions used by a module
j, the second element defines the list of all tags (excluding their
multiplicity), the third element determines the list whose sublists
determine Goto functions with the tags corresponding to them
(in addition, as the first elements of these sublists the calls of the Goto
function appear, whereas multiplicities of functions and tags remain).
The fragment below represents source code of the GotoLabel
procedure along with typical examples of its application.
In[7]:= GotoLabel[x_ /; BlockModQ[x]] := Module[{b, d, p, k = 1,
c = {{}, {}, {}}, j, h, v = {}, t, a = Flatten[{PureDefinition[x]}][[1]]},
b = ExtrVarsOfStr[a, 1];
b = DeleteDuplicates[Select[b, MemberQ[{"Label", "Goto"}, #] &]];
If[b == {}, c, d = StringPosition[a, Map[" " <> # <> "[" &,
115
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
{"Label", "Goto"}]]; t = StringLength[a];
For[k, k <= Length[d], k++, p = d[[k]]; h = ""; j = p[[2]];
While[j <= t, h = h <> StringTake[a, {j, j}];
If[StringCount[h, "["] == StringCount[h, "]"],
AppendTo[v, StringTake[a, {p[[1]] + 1, p[[2]] – 1}] <> h];
Break[]]; j++]]; h = DeleteDuplicates[v];
{Select[h, SuffPref[#, "Goto", 1] &],
Select[h, SuffPref[#, "Label", 1] &], Gather[Sort[v], #1 ==
StringReplace[#2, "Label[" –> "Goto[", 1] &]}]]
In[8]:= ArtKr[x_ /; IntegerQ[x]] := Module[{prime, agn},
If[PrimeQ[x], Goto[9; prime], If[OddQ[x], Goto[agn],
Goto[Sin]]]; Label[9; prime]; Print[x^2]; Goto[Sin];
Print[NextPrime[x]]; Goto[Sin]; Label[9; prime]; Null]
In[9]:= GotoLabel[ArtKr]
Out[9]= {{"Goto[9; prime]", "Goto[agn]", "Goto[Sin]"},
{"Label[9; prime]"}, {{"Goto[9; prime]", "Label[9; prime]",
"Label[9; prime]"}, {"Goto[agn]"}, {"Goto[Sin]", "Goto[Sin]",
"Goto[Sin]"}}}
In[10]:= Map[GotoLabel, {GotoLabel, TestArgsTypes, CallsInMean}]
Out[10]= {{{}, {}, {}}, {{}, {}, {}}, {{}, {}, {}}}
In[11]:= Map[GotoLabel, {SearchDir, StrDelEnds, OP, BootDrive}]
Out[11]= {{{}, {}, {}}, {{}, {}, {}}, {{"Goto[ArtKr]"}, {"Label[ArtKr]"},
{{"Goto[ArtKr]", "Label[ArtKr]"}}}, {{"Goto[avz]"}, {"Label[avz]"},
{{"Goto[avz]", "Goto[avz]", "Goto[avz]", "Label[avz]"}}}
We will note that existence of the nested list with the third
sublist containing Goto–functions without tags corresponding
to them, in the result returned by means call GotoLabel[j] not
necessarily speaks about existence of the function calls Goto[j]
for which not exists any Label[j] tag. It can be, for example, in
the case of generation of a value depending on some condition.
In[320]:= Av[x_Integer, y_Integer, p_ /; MemberQ[{1, 2, 3}, p]] :=
Module[{}, Goto[p]; Label[1]; Return[x + y]; Label[2];
Return[N[x/y]]; Label[3]; Return[x*y]]
In[321]:= Map[Av[590, 90, #] &, {1, 2, 3, 4}]
Out[321]= {680, 6.55556, 53100, Av[590, 90, 4]}
In[322]:= GotoLabel[Av]
Out3[22]= {{"Goto[p]"}, {"Label[1]", "Label[2]", "Label[3]"},
{{"Goto[p]"}, {"Label[1]"}, {"Label[2]"}, {"Label[3]"}}}
116
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
For example, according to simple example of the previous
fragment the call GotoLabel[Av] contains {"Goto[p]"} in the
third sublist what, at first sight, it would be possible to consider
as an impropriety of the corresponding call of Goto function.
However, all the matter is that a value of actual p argument in
the call Av[x,y,p] and defines a tag really existing in definition
of the procedure, i.e. Label[p]. Therefore, the GotoLabel module
only at the formal level analyzes existence of the Goto functions,
"incorrect" from its point of view with "excess" tags. Whereas
refinement of the results received on a basis of a procedure call
GotoLabel[W] lies on the user, above all, by means of analysis
of accordance of source code of the W to the correctness of the
required algorithm.
As a Label may be a correct sentence, for example:
In[9]:= a[x_, y_] := Module[{a, b, c}, If[x/y > 7, Goto[a], Goto[b]];
Label[a[t_] := t^2; a]; c = a[x]; Goto[Fin]; Label[b[t_] := t^3; b];
c = b[y]; Label[Fin]; c]
In[10]:= {a[7, 12], a[77, 7]}
Out[10]= {1728, 5929}
The structured paradigm of programming doesn't assume
application in programs of the Goto constructions allowing to
transfer control from bottom to top. At the same time, in some
cases the use of Goto function is rather effective, for example,
at needing of embedding into Mathematica of programs which
use unconditional transitions on a basis of the goto offer. Thus,
Fortran programs can be adduced as a typical example that are
very widespread in scientific appendices. From our experience
follows, that the use of Goto function allowed significantly to
simplify embedding into Mathematica of a number of rather
large Fortran programs relating to the engineering and physical
applications that very widely use the goto constructions. Right
there it should be noted that from our standpoint the function
Goto of Mathematica is more preferable, than goto function of
Maple in respect of efficiency in the light of application in the
procedural programming of various appendices, including also
appendices of the system character.
117
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
3.2. Cyclic control structures in Mathematica
One of the basic cyclic structures of Mathematica is based
on the For function having the following coding format:
For[start of a loop variable, test, increment, loop body]
Starting from a given initial value of loop variable, the loop
body that contains language sentences is cyclically computed,
with the loop variable cyclically incremented by an increment
until the logical condition (test) remains True. The control words
Continue[] (continuation) and {Break[], Return[]} (termination)
respectively are used to control the For–cycle, as the following
example well illustrates:
In[21]:= a := {7, 6, c, 8, d, f, g}; b := {a1, d, c1, 77, f1, m, n, t};
In[22]:= For[k = 1, k <= 1000, k++, p = a[[k]]; If[PrimeQ[p],
Break[p], If[IntegerQ[p], Return[], Continue[]]]]
Out[22]= 7
In[23]:= For[k = 1, k <= 1000, k++, p = b[[k]]; If[PrimeQ[p],
Break[p], If[IntegerQ[p], Return[p], Continue[]]]]
Out[23]= Return[77]
In[24]:= For[k = 1, k <= 1000, k++, p = b[[k]]; If[PrimeQ[p],
Break[], If[IntegerQ[p], Print[{k, p}]; Return[], Continue[]]]]
{4, 77}
Out[24]= Return[]
In[25]:= A[x___] := Module[{}, For[k = 1, k <= Infinity,
k++, p = b[[k]]; If[PrimeQ[p], Break[], If[IntegerQ[p],
Return[p], Continue[]]]]]
In[26]:= A[]
Out[26]= 77
In[27]:= G[x_] := (If[x > 10, Return[x]]; x^2)
In[28]:= G[90]
Out[28]= 90
Meanwhile, note in mind that Return[] terminates the loop
both outside and inside the procedure or function. In addition,
in the first case, the loop ends by Return[], while in the second
case the termination of the loop by Return allows by means of
the call Return[E] additionally to return a certain E expression,
118
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
for example, a result at the end of the loop. The For-loop allows
an arbitrary level of nesting, depending on the size of working
area of the software environment. Moreover, in both cases by
means of Break[gsv] can not only terminate the loop, but also
return the required gsv expression.
In our books [1-3] the reciprocal functional equivalence of
both systems is visually illustrated when the most important
computing structures of Mathematica with this or that efficiency
are simulated by Maple constructions and vice versa. Truly, in
principle, it is a quite expected result because built-in languages
of both systems are universal and in this regard with one or the
other efficiency they can program an arbitrary algorithm. But in
the time relation it is not so and at use of the loop structures of
a rather large nesting level the Maple can have rather essential
advantages before Mathematica. For confirmation we will give
a simple example of a loop construction programmed both in
the Maple, and the Mathematica system.
The results speak for themselves – if for the Maple 11 the
execution of the following for–loop of the nesting 8 requires 7.8
s, the Mathematica 12.1 for execution of the same loop on base
of For–function requires already 51.372 s, i.e. approximately 6.6
times more (estimations have been obtained on Dell OptiPlex 3020,
i5-4570 3.2 GHz with 64-bit Windows 7 Professional 6.1.7601 service
pack 1 Build 7601). In addition, with growth of the nesting depth
and range of a loop variable at implementation of the loops this
difference rather significantly grows.
> t := time(): for k1 to 10 do for k2 to 10 do for k3 to 10 do for k4 to
10 do for k5 to 10 do for k6 to 10 do for k7 to 10 do for k8 to 10 do
900 end do end do end do end do end do end do end do end do:
time() – t;
# (Maple 11)
7.800
In[8]= n = 10; t = TimeUsed[]; For[k1 = 1, k1 <= n, k1++,
For[k2 = 1, k2 <= n, k2++, For[k3 = 1, k3 <= n, k3++,
For[k4 = 1, k4 <= n, k4++, For[k5 = 1, k5 <= n, k5++,
For[k6 = 1, k6 <= n, k6++, For[k7 = 1, k7 <= n, k7++,
For[k8 = 1, k8 <= n, k8++, 500]]]]]]]]; TimeUsed[] - t
Out[8]= 51.372
119
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
Our long experience [1-42] of using Maple and Matematica
systems of different versions has clearly shown that, in general,
programming of loops in the first system is more efficient in the
temporal relation.
As another fairly widely used tool in Mathematica for the
organization of cyclic calculations is the Do-function, which has
the following six coding formats, namely:
Do[E, n] – evaluates an expression E n times;
Do[E, {j, p}] – evaluates E with variable j successively taking
on the values 1 through k (in steps of 1);
Do[E, {j, k, p}] – starts with j = k;
Do[E, {j, k, p, dt}] – uses steps dt;
Do[E, {j, {k1, k2,…}}] – uses the successive values k1, k2,…;
Do[Exp, {j, j1, j2}, {k, k1, k2},…] – evaluates Exp looping over
different values of k etc. for each j.
In the above Do-constructions, there can be both individual
expressions and sequences of language sentences as E and Exp
(body). To exit the Do loop prematurely or continue it, the body
of a loop uses functions Return, Break, Continue; in the case of
the nested Do loop, control in such constructions is transferred
to the external loop. Examples of Do-loops of the above formats
In[11]:= t := 0; Do[t = t + 1, 1000000]; t
Out[11]= 1000000
In[12]:= t := 0; Do[t = t + k^2, {k, 1000}]; t
Out[12]= 333833500
In[13]:= t := 0; Do[t = t + k^2, {k, 1000, 10000}]; t
Out[13]= 333050501500
In[14]:= t := 0; Do[t = t + k^2, {k, 1000, 10000, 20}]; t
Out[14]= 16700530000
In[15]:= t := 0; Do[t = t + k^2 + j^2 + h^2, {k, 10, 100},
{j, 10, 100}, {h, 10, 100}]; t
Out[15]= 8398548795
In[16]:= A[x_] := Module[{t = 0}, Do[If[t++ > x, Return[t],
Continue[]], Infinity]]; A[900]
Out[16]= 902
120
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
In[17]:= A1[x_] := Module[{t = 0}, Do[If[t++ > x, Break[t],
Continue[]], Infinity]]; A1[900]
Out[17]= 902
In[18]:= t = 0; Do[If[t++ > 100, Return[t], Continue[]], 1000]
Out[18]= 102
In[19]:= t = 0; Do[If[t++ > 100, Break[t], Continue[]], 1000]
Out[19]= 102
In[20]:= t := 0; k = 1; Do[t = t + k^2; If[k >= 30, Break[t],
Continue[]], {k, 1000}]; {t, k}
Out[20]= {9455, 1}
Note that Break and Return make sense for exit of Do loop
both within a procedure containing this loop, and outside it. At
the same time, the loop variable is local (see the last example of the
previous fragment). Here is a list of several more Mathematica
functions for cyclic computing:
While[E, body] – evaluates E, then repetitively evaluates body
until E to give True;
In[3338]:= {t, v} = {0, {}}; While[t++; t <= 100,
s = Total[AppendTo[v, t]]]; s
Out[3338]= 5050
Nest[F, E, n] – returns the result of application of a function F to
an E expression n times;
In[3339]:= Nest[F, (a + b + c), 6]
Out[3339]= F[F[F[F[F[F[a + b + c]]]]]]
FixedPoint[F, E] – starting with E, F is applied repeatedly until
two nearby results will identical; in addition FixedPoint[F, E, n] stops
after at most n steps. FixedPoint returns the last result it gets.
In[3340]:= FixedPoint[Sqrt, 19.42, 15]
Out[3340]= 1.00009
The FixedPoint1 procedure is a program equivalent of the
FixedPoint based on Do loop:
In[5]:= FixedPoint1[f_, e_, n___] := Module[{a = e, b, p = 1},
Do[b = f @@ {a}; If[SameQ[b, a], Return[], a = b; p++;
Continue[]], If[{n} == {}, 10^10, n]]; {p – 1, b}]
In[6]:= FixedPoint1[Sqrt, 19.42, 15]
121
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
Out[6]= {15, 1.00009}
In[7]:= FixedPoint1[Sqrt, 19.42]
Out[7]= {52, 1.}
The procedure call FixedPoint1[f, e, n] returns the list of the
form {p, FixedPoint[f, e, n]}, where p is the number of steps of
the procedure required to obtain the desired result, whereas n
is optional argument similar to n of FixedPoint[f, e, n].
NestWhile[F, E, Test] – starting with E, F is applied repeatedly
until applying Test to the result gives False;
In[1119]:= N[NestWhile[Sqrt, 90050, # > 7 &]]
Out[1119]= 4.16208
The NestWhile1 procedure is a program equivalent of the
NestWhile based on Do loop:
In[1132]:= NestWhile1[f_, e_, t_] := Module[{a = e, b, p = 1},
Do[b = f @@ {a}; If[! t @@ {b}, Return[], a = b; p++;
Continue[]], Infinity]; {p, b}]
In[1133]:= N[NestWhile1[Sqrt, 90050, # > 7 &]]
Out[1133]= {3., 4.16208}
The procedure call NestWhile1[f, e, t] returns the list of the
form {p, NestWhile[f, e, t]}, where p is the number of steps of the
procedure required to obtain the desired result, whereas t is the
t test analogous to t for NestWhile[f, e, t]. At that, in addition to
the presented format the NestWhile has additional five formats,
with which the reader can familiarize in the Mathematica help.
TakeWhile[L, t] – returns elements of a list L from the beginning
of the list, continuing so long as t for the L elements gives True.
In[1134]:= TakeWhile[{a, b, c, 7, e, r, 15, k, h, m, n, g, s, w},
SymbolQ[#] || PrimeQ[#] &]
Out[1134]= {a, b, c, 7, e, r}
The TakeWhile1 procedure is a program equivalent of the
TakeWhile based on Do loop:
In[1135]:= TakeWhile1[L_List, t_] := Module[{p = {}},
Do[If[t @@ {L[[j]]}, AppendTo[p, L[[j]]], Return[{j, p}]],
{j, Length[L]}]]
122
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
In[1136]:= TakeWhile1[{a, b, c, 7, e, r, 15, k, h, m, n, k, h},
SymbolQ[#] || PrimeQ[#] &]
Out[1136]= {7, {a, b, c, 7, e, r}}
The procedure call TakeWhile1[L, T] returns the list of the
form {p, TakeWhile[L, T]}, where p is the number of steps of the
procedure required to obtain the desired result, whereas T is the
test analogous to T in TakeWhile[L, T].
Catch[exp] – returns the argument of the first Throw call that is
generated in the evaluation of an exp expression.
In[4906]:= Catch[Do[If[j > 100 && PrimeQ[j], Throw[j]],
{j, Infinity}]]
Out[4906]= 101
At that, in addition to the presented format the Catch has
additional two formats, with which the reader can familiarize
in [15] or in the Mathematica help. The Break, Return, Goto and
Continue functions are used to control whether the loop exits or
continues, respectively. Other functions that make substantial
use of cyclic computing can be found in the Mathematica help.
In addition, most of them have rather simple program analogs
using the basic functions Do, For of the loop along with function
If of conditional transitions and functions of loop termination
control Break, Return, Continue to organize cyclic calculations.
Some instructive examples of similar program counterparts are
presented above. The above largely applies to both simple and
the nested loops whose attachments can alternating and shared
different types of loops.
3.3. Special types of cyclic control structures in Mathematica
Along with the basic cyclic structures discussed above, the
Mathematica has a number of useful special control structures
of cyclic type, which allow to significantly simplify the solution
of a number of important tasks. Such structures are realized on
the basis of a number of built-in functions Map, MapAt, MapAll,
MapIndexed, Select, Sum, Product, etc., allowing to describe the
algorithms of mass tasks of processing and calculations in a very
123
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
compact way. In addition, not only good visibility of programs
is ensured, but also rather high efficiency of their execution. At
the same time, first of all, the tools of the so–called Map group,
among which the Map function is the most used, appear to be
important. Consider this group a little more detailed.
The main Map function has two formats, namely:
Map[F, exp] or F/@exp – returns the result of applying of F to
each element of the first level of an expression exp;
Map[F, exp, levels] – returns the result of applying of F to parts
of an expression exp specified by levels; as the values for the levels
argument can be:
n
– levels from 1 through n
Infinity – levels from 1 through Infinity
{n}
– level n only
{n1, n2} – levels from n1 through n2
Here are some examples of management by Map execution:
In[1]:= A[x_, y_] := Module[{t = {}}, Map[If[# <= x,
AppendTo[t, F[#]], Goto[g]] &, Range[y]]; Label[g]; t]
In[2]:= A[7, 90]
Out[2]= {F[1], F[2], F[3], F[4], F[5], F[6], F[7]}
In[3]:= A1[x_, y_] := Module[{t = {}}, CheckAbort[Map[
If[# <= x, AppendTo[t, F[#]], Abort[]] &, Range[y]], t]]
In[4]:= A1[7, 90]
Out[4]= {F[1], F[2], F[3], F[4], F[5], F[6], F[7]}
In[5]:= Map[g, Map[If[OddQ[#], #, Nothing] &, Range[18]]]
Out[5]= {g[1], g[3], g[5], g[7], g[9], g[11], g[13], g[15], g[17]}
In[6]:= t = {}; CheckAbort[Map[If[# <= 7, AppendTo[t, F[#]],
Abort[]] &, Range[90]], t]
Out[6]= {F[1], F[2], F[3], F[4], F[5], F[6], F[7]}
In[7]:= Map[j, (a + b)/(c – d)*m*n, Infinity]
Out[7]= j[m]*j[n]*j[j[a] + j[b]]*j[j[j[c] + j[j[–1]*j[d]]]^j[–1]]
MapAll[f, exp] is equivalent to Map[f, exp, {0, Infinity}]. At
the same time, the call MapAll[f, exp, Heads –> True] returns the
result of applying of f to heads in exp additionally. Whereas the
MapIndexed function also has two formats, namely:
124
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
MapIndexed[F, exp] – returns the result of applying of F to the
elements of an expression exp, giving the part number of each element
as the second argument to F;
MapIndexed[F, exp, levels] – returns the result of applying of
F to all parts of exp on levels specified by levels.
As a program implementation of the MapIndexed function
of the first format can be given:
In[20]:= MapIndexed[F, (a + b)/(c – d) + m*n]
Out[20]= F[(a + b)/(c – d), {1}] + F[m*n, {2}]
In[21]:= MapIndexed1[F_, e_] := Module[{p = 1}, Part[e, 0]
@@ Map[F[#, {p++}] &, Op[e]]]
In[22]:= MapIndexed1[F, (a + b)/(c – d) + m*n]
Out[22]= F[(a + b)/(c – d), {1}] + F[m*n, {2}]
The program implementation of the second format of the
MapIndexed function we leave to the reader as a useful exercise.
The SubsetMap function has two formats, namely:
SubsetMap[g, j, j1] – returns the result of replacing of elements
of a j list by the corresponding elements (whose positions are defined
by a list j1) of the list obtained by evaluating g[j].
SubsetMap[g, j, L] – returns the result of replacing of elements
jn of an expression j at positions L on g[jn].
Here are some examples of the SubsetMap use:
In[6]:= SubsetMap[Power[#, 3] &, {a, b, c, d, g, h, t}, {1, 3, 5, 7}]
Out[6]= {a^3, b, c^3, d, g^3, h, t^3}
In[7]:= SubsetMap[Power[#, 7] &, {a, b, c, d, g, h, m, t}, 3;;7]
Out[7]= {a, b, c^7, d^7, g^7, h^7, m^7, t}
As a program implementation of the SubsetMap1 function
of the first format for case of lists as an argument j can be given:
In[9]:= SubsetMap1[F_, j_, L_] := Map[If[MemberQ[L,
Flatten[Position[j, #]][[1]]], g[#], #] &, j]
In[10]:= SubsetMap1[g, {a, b, c, d, g, h, m, t}, {3, 4, 5, 6, 7}]
Out[10]= {a, b, g[c], g[d], g[g], g[h], g[m], t}
The program realization of the more common cases of the
SubsetMap function we leave to the reader as a useful exercise.
125
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
Frequently used functions such as Sum, Product, Delete and
Select also may be carried to cyclic constructions. Function Sum
has five formats of coding from which as an example give the
following format:
Sum[F[j], {j, {j1, j2, j3,…}}] – returns the result of summarizing
of an expression F[j] using successive values j1, j2, j3,… for j.
Here is function examples use and its program analogue:
In[3336]:= Sum[1/j^2, {j, {1, Infinity}}]
Out[3336]= 1
In[3337]:= Total[Map[1/#^2 &, {1, Infinity}]]
Out[3337]= 1
In[3338]:= Sum[(j + 1)/j^2, {j, {1, m}}]
Out[3338]= 2 + (1 + m)/m^2
In[3339]:= Total[Map[(# + 1)/#^2 &, {1, m}]]
Out[3339]= 2 + (1 + m)/m^2
Function Delete has three formats of coding do not causing
any difficulties. Both functions allow multiple levels of nesting.
Once again, the functions underlying cyclic constructions allow
nesting. Function Select has two formats of coding, namely:
Select[L, test] – returns the list of elements Lj of L list for which
test gives True;
Select[L, test, n] – returns the list of the first n elements Lj of L
list for which test gives True.
Here is function examples use and its program analogue:
In[4272]:= Select[{a, b, 77, c, 7, d, 14, 5, n}, SymbolQ[#] &&
! SameQ[#, a] || PrimeQ[#] &]
Out[4272]= {b, c, 7, d, 5}
In[4275]:= Select5[L_, test_, n___] := Module[{t},
t = Map[If[test @@ {#}, #, Nothing] &, L];
If[{n} == {}, t, If[Length[t] >= n, t[[1 ;; n]], "Invalid third
argument value"]]]
In[4276]:= Select5[{a, b, 77, c, 7, d, 14, 5}, SymbolQ[#] &&
! SameQ[#, a] || PrimeQ[#] &]
Out[4276]= {b, c, 7, d, 5}
In[4277]:= Select5[{a, b, 77, c, 7, d, 14, 5}, SymbolQ[#] &&
! SameQ[#, a] || PrimeQ[#] &, 3]
126
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
Out[4277]= {b, c, 7}
In[4285]:= Select5[L_, test_, n___] := {Save["#77#", t],
t = Map[If[test @@ {#}, #, Nothing] &, L], If[{n} == {}, t,
If[Length[t] >= n, t[[1 ;; n]], "Invalid third argument value"]],
Get["#77#"], DeleteFile["#77#"]}[[–3]]
In[4286]:= t = 2020; Select5[{a, b, 77, c, 7, d, 14, 5},
SymbolQ[#] && ! SameQ[#, a] || PrimeQ[#] &, 3]
Out[4286]= {b, c, 7}
In[4287]:= t
Out[4287]= 2020
In[4288]:= Select5[{a, b, 77, c, 7, d, 14, 5}, SymbolQ[#] &&
! SameQ[#, a] || PrimeQ[#] &, 7]
Out[4288]= "Invalid third argument value"
In[8]:= Nest1[F_Symbol, x_, n_Integer] := {Save["#78#", a],
a = x, Do[a = F[a], n], a, Get["#78#"], DeleteFile["#78#"]}[[-3]]
In[9]:= a = 77; Nest1[G, m + n, 7]
Out[9]= G[G[G[G[G[G[G[m + n]]]]]]]
In[10]:= Nest2[F_List, x_] := {Save["#78#", a], a = x,
Do[a = Reverse[F][[j]][a], {j, Length[F]}], a, Get["#78#"],
DeleteFile["#78#"]}[[–3]]
In[11]:= {a, j} = {42, 77}; {Nest2[{F, G, H, S, V}, x], {42, 77}}
Out[11]= {F[G[H[S[V[x]]]]], {42, 77}}
The previous fragment also represents program realizations
of the built-in Select (Select5) and Nest (Nest1) functions in the
form of functions of the list format along with an extension of
the Nest (Nest2). The function call Nest2[{a, b, c, d, …}, x] where
{a, b, c, d,…} – the list of symbols and x – an expression, returns
a[b[c[d[…[x]…]]]]. In these functions, the question of localizing
variables by means of built–in Save, Get, DeleteFile functions
may be of definite interest. It is shown [6] that for most built–in
functions which provide the cyclic structures, it is possible to
successfully program their analogues based on system Map, Do
and If functions. Because of the importance of the Map function
we have created a so-called Map-group consisting of the Map1÷
Map24 means which cover a wide range of applications [6,16].
127
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
3.4. Mathematica tools for string expressions
The Mathematica language provides a variety of functions
for manipulating strings. Most of these functions are based on a
viewing strings as a sequence of characters, and many of these
functions are analogous to ones for manipulating lists. Without
taking into account the fact that Mathematica has a rather large
set of tools for work with string structures, the necessity of tools
which are absent in it arises. Some of such tools are represented
in the given section; among them are available both simple, and
more difficult which appeared in the course of programming of
tasks of various purpose as additional procedures and functions
and simplifying or facilitating the programming. The section
presents a number of tools providing usefulenough operations
on strings which supplement and expand the standard system
means. These means are widely used at programming of many
tools in our package Mathematica, as well as in programming
other applications. More fully these tools are presented in [16].
Examples throughout this book illustrate formalization of
procedures in the Mathematica that reflects its basic elements
and principles, allowing by taking into account the material to
directly start creation, at the beginning, of simple procedures of
different purpose that are based on processing of string objects.
Here only procedures of so–called "system" character intended
for processing of string structures are considered that, however,
represent also the most direct applied interest for programming
of various appendices. Moreover, the procedures and functions
that have quite foreseeable volume of source code that allows
to carry out their a rather simple analysis are represented here.
Their analysis can serve as a rather useful exercise for the reader
both who is beginning programming and already having rather
serious experience in this direction. Later we will understand
under "system" tools the actually built–in tools, and our tools
oriented on mass application. In addition it should be noted that
string structures are of special interest not only as basic structures
with which the system and the user operate, but also as a basis,
in particular, of dynamic generation of objects in Mathematica,
128
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
including procedures and functions. The mechanism of dynamic
generation is quite simple and enough in detail is considered in
[8-15], whereas examples of its use can be found in source codes
of tools of the present book. Below we will present a number of
useful enough means for strings processing in Mathematica.
The procedure call SuffPref[S, s, n] provides testing of a S
string regarding to begin (n=1), to end (n=2) or both ends (n=3)
be limited by a substring or substrings from a s list. In a case of
establishment of such fact the SuffPref returns True, otherwise
False is returned. Whereas the function call StrStr[x] provides
return an expression x different from a string, in string format,
and a double string otherwise. In a number of cases the StrStr
function is a rather useful at working with strings, in particular,
with the standard StringReplace function. The following below
represents source codes of the above tools along with examples
of their application.
In[7]:= SuffPref[S_ /; StringQ[S], s_ /; StringQ[s]||ListQ[s] &&
AllTrue[Map[StringQ, s], TrueQ], n_ /; MemberQ[{1, 2, 3}, n]] :=
Module[{a, b, c, k = 1}, If[StringFreeQ[S, s], False,
b = StringLength[S]; c = Flatten[StringPosition[S, s]];
If[n == 3 && c[[1]] == 1 && c[[–1]] == b, True,
If[n == 1 && c[[1]] == 1, True,
If[n == 2 && c[[–1]] == b, True, False]]]]]
In[8]:= StrStr[x_] := If[StringQ[x], "\"" <> x <> "\"", ToString[x]]
In[9]:= Map[StrStr, {"RANS", a + b, IAN, {72, 77, 67}, F[x, y]}]
Out[9]= {"\"RANS\"", "a + b", "IAN", "{72, 77, 67}", "F[x, y]"}
In[10]:= SuffPref["IAN_RANS_RAC_REA_90_500", "90_500", 2]
Out[10]= True
If the StrStr function is intended, first of all, for creation of
double strings, then the following simple procedure converts
double strings and strings of higher nesting level to the classical
strings. The procedure call ReduceString[x] returns the result of
converting of a string x to the usual classical string.
In[15]:= ReduceString[x_ /; StringQ[x]] := Module[{a = x},
Do[If[SuffPref[a, "\"", 3], a = StringTake[a, {2, –2}],
Return[a]], {j, 1, Infinity}]]
129
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
In[16]:= ReduceString["\"\"\"\"\"{a + b, \"g\", s}\"\"\"\"\""]
Out[16]= "{a + b, \"g\", s}"
The SuffPrefList procedure [8,16] is a rather useful version
of the above SuffPref procedure concerning the lists. At n=1, the
procedure call SuffPrefList[x, y, n] returns the maximal subset
common for the lists x and y with their beginning, whereas at
n=2, the procedure call SuffPrefList[x, y, n] returns the maximal
subset common for the lists x and y since their end, otherwise
the call returns two–element sublist whose elements define the
above limiting sublists of the lists x and y with the both ends;
moreover, if the call SuffPrefList[x, y, n, z] has fourth optional z
argument – an arbitrary function from one argument, then each
element of lists x and y is previously processed by a z function.
The fragment below represents source code of the SuffPrefList
procedure along with typical example of its application.
In[7]:= SuffPrefList[x_ /; ListQ[x], y_ /; ListQ[y],
t_ /; MemberQ[{1, 2, 3}, t], z___] :=
Module[{a = Sort[Map[Length, {x, y}]], b = x, c = y, d = {{}, {}}, j},
If[{z} != {} && FunctionQ[z] || SystemQ[z],
{b, c} = {Map[z, b], Map[z, c]}, 6]; Goto[t]; Label[3]; Label[1];
Do[If[b[[j]] === c[[j]], AppendTo[d[[1]], b[[j]]], Break[]], {j, 1, a[[1]]}];
If[t == 1, Goto[Exit], 6]; Label[2];
Do[If[b[[j]] === c[[j]], AppendTo[d[[2]], b[[j]]], Break[]],
{j, –1, –a[[1]], –1}]; d[[2]] = Reverse[d[[2]]]; Label[Exit];
If[t == 1, d[[1]], If[t == 2, d[[2]], {d[[1]], d[[2]]}]]]
In[8]:= SuffPrefList[{x, y, x, y, a, b, c, x, y, x, y}, {x, y, x, y}, 3]
Out[8]= {{x, y, x, y}, {x, y, x, y}}
StringTrim1÷ StringTrim3 procedures are useful extensions
to the built-in StringTrim function. In particular, the procedure
call StringTrim3[S, s, s1, s2, n, m] returns the result of truncation
of a S string by s symbols on the left (n=1), on the right (n=2) or
both ends (n=3) a for case of s1 = "" and s2 = "", at condition that
truncating is done onto m depth. Whereas in a case of the s1 and
s2 arguments different from empty string instead of truncatings
the corresponding insertings of strings s1 (at the left) and s2 (on
the right) are done. Thus, the arguments s1 and s2 – two string
130
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
arguments for processing of the ends of the initial S string at the
left and on the right accordingly are defined. In addition, in a
case of S = "" or s = "" the procedure call returns the S string; at
that, a single character or their string can act as the s argument.
The fragment below represents source code of the StringTrim3
procedure along with typical example of its application.
In[7]:= StringTrim3[S_String, s_String, s1_String, s2_String,
n_Integer, m_ /; MemberQ[{1, 2, 3}, m]] :=
Module[{a = S, b, c = "", p = 1, t = 1, h},
If[S == "" || s == "", S, Do[b = StringPosition[a, s];
If[b == {}, Break[], a = StringReplacePart[a, "",
If[m == 1, {If[b[[1]][[1]] == 1, p++; b[[1]], Nothing]},
If[m == 2, {If[b[[–1]][[2]] == StringLength[a], t++; b[[–1]],
Nothing]}, {If[b[[1]][[1]] == 1, p++; b[[1]], Nothing],
If[b[[–1]][[2]] == StringLength[a], t++; b[[–1]], Nothing]}]]]];
If[a == c, Break[], 6]; c = a, {j, 1, n}]; h = {p, t} – {1, 1};
If[m == 1, StringRepeat[s1, h[[1]]] <> c,
If[m == 2, c <> StringRepeat[s2, h[[2]]],
StringRepeat[s1, h[[1]]] <> c <> StringRepeat[s2, h[[2]]]]]]]
In[8]:= StringTrim3["dd1dd1ddaabcddd1d1dd1dd1dd1dd1dd1",
"dd1", "avz", "agn", 3, 3]
Out[8]= "avzavzddaabcddd1d1dd1dd1agnagnagn"
Thus, by varying of values of the actual arguments {s, s1, s2,
n, m}, it is possible to processing of the ends of arbitrary strings
in a rather wide range.
The call SequenceCases[x, y] of the built-in function returns
the list of all sublists in a x list that match a sequence pattern y.
In addition, the default option Overlaps –> False is assumed,
therefore the SequenceCases call returns only sublists which do
not overlap. In addition to the function the following procedure
is presented as a rather useful tool. The call SequenceCases1[x,y]
as a whole returns the nested list whose two–element sublists
have the following format {n, h} where h – the sublist of a list x
which is formed by means of maximally admissible continuous
concatenation of a list y, and n – an initial position in the list x
of this sublist. At that, the procedure call SequenceCases1[x,y,z]
with 3rd optional z argument – an undefinite symbol – through z
131
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
returns the nested list whose the 1st element defines the sublists
maximal in length in format {m, n, p}, where m – the length of a
sublist and n, p – its first and end position accordingly, whereas
the 2nd element determines the sublists minimal in length of the
above format with obvious modification. In a case of erroneous
situations the procedure call returns $Failed or empty list. The
following fragment represents the source code of the procedure
with typical examples of its application.
In[7]:= SequenceCases1[x_ /; ListQ[x], y_ /; ListQ[y], z___] :=
Module[{a = SequencePosition[x, y], b = 6, c, t},
If[Length[y] > Length[x], $Failed,
While[! SameQ[a, b], a = Gather[a, #1[[2]] == #2[[1]] – 1 &];
a = Map[Extract[#, {{1}, {–1}}] &, Map[Flatten, a]];
b = Gather[a, #1[[2]] == #2[[1]] – 1 &];
b = Map[Extract[#, {{1}, {–1}}] &, Map[Flatten, b]]];
b = Map[{#[[1]], Part[x, #[[1]] ;; #[[–1]]]} &, b];
If[{z} == {}, b, c = Map[{#[[1]], Length[#[[2]]]} &, b];
c = Map8[Max, Min, Map[#[[2]] &, c]];
z = {Map[If[Set[t, Length[#[[2]]]] == c[[1]], {c[[1]], #[[1]], #[[1]] +
t – 1}, Nothing] &, b], Map[If[Set[t, Length[#[[2]]]] == c[[2]],
{c[[2]], #[[1]], #[[1]] + t – 1}, Nothing] &, b]};
z = Map[If[Length[#] == 1, #[[1]], #] &, z]; b]]]
In[8]:= SequenceCases1[{a, x, y, x, y, x, y, x, y, x, y, x, y, x, y, a, m,
n, x, y, b, c, x, y, x, y, h, x, y}, {x, y}]
Out[8]= {{2, {x, y, x, y, x, y, x, y, x, y, x, y, x, y}}, {19, {x, y}},
{23, {x, y, x, y}}, {28, {x, y}}}
In[9]:= SequenceCases1[{a, x, y, x, y, x, y, x, y, x, y, x, y, x, y, a, m,
n, x, y, b, c, x, y, x, y, h, x, y}, {x, y}, g]; g
Out[9]= {{14, 2, 15}, {{2, 19, 20}, {2, 28, 29}}}
Additionally to the built-in StringReplace function and the
four our procedures StringReplace1÷StringReplace4, extending
the first, the following procedure represents undoubted interest.
The procedure call StringReplaceVars[S, r] returns the result of
replacement in a string S of all occurrences of the left sides of a
rule or their list r onto the right sides corresponding to them. In
a case of absence of the above left sides entering in the S string
132
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
the procedure call returns initial S string. Distinctive feature of
the procedure is the fact, that it considers the left sides of r rules
as separately located expressions in the S string, i.e. framed by
the special characters. The procedure is of interest at processing
of strings. The following fragment represents source code of the
StringReplaceVars procedure with typical examples of its use.
In[7]:= StringReplaceVars[S_ /; StringQ[S], r_ /; RuleQ[r] ||
ListRulesQ[r]] := Module[{a = "(" <> S <> ")",
L = Characters["`!@#%^&*(){}:\"\\/|<>?~–=+[];:'., 1234567890_"],
R = Characters["`!@#%^&*(){}:\"\\/|<>?~–=+[];:'., _"], b, c,
g = If[RuleQ[r], {r}, r]},
Do[b = StringPosition[a, g[[j]][[1]]];
c = Select[b, MemberQ[L, StringTake[a, {#[[1]] – 1}]] &&
MemberQ[R, StringTake[a, {#[[2]] + 1}]] &];
a = StringReplacePart[a, g[[j]][[2]], c], {j, 1, Length[g]}];
StringTake[a, {2, –2}]]
In[8]:= StringReplaceVars["Sqrt[t*p] + t^t", "t" –> "(a + b)"]
Out[8]= "Sqrt[(a + b)*p] + (a + b)^(a + b)"
In[9]:= StringReplaceVars["(125 123 678 123 90)", {"123" –> "abc",
"678" –> "mn", "90" –> "avz"}]
Out[9]= "(125 abc mn abc avz)"
The following procedure – a version of the StringReplaceVars
procedure that is useful in the certain cases. The procedure call
StringReplaceVars1[S, x, y, r] returns the result of replacement in
a string S of all occurrences of the left sides of a rule or their list
r to the right sides corresponding to them. In a case of absence
of the above left sides entering in the S string the procedure call
returns the initial S string. Distinctive feature of this procedure
with respect to the procedure StringReplaceVars is the fact that
it considers the left sides of r rules which are separately located
expressions in the S string, i.e. they are framed on the left by the
characters from a string x and are framed on the right by means
of characters from a string y. The procedure is of certain interest
at strings processing, in particular, at processing of definitions
in string format of blocks and modules. The following fragment
represents an example of the StringReplaceVars1 procedure use.
133
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
In[3317]:= StringReplaceVars1["{a = \"ayb\", b = Sin[x],
c = {\"a\", 77}, d = {\"a\", \"b\"}}", "{( 1234567890", " })",
{"a" –> "m", "b" –> "n"}]
Out[3317]= "{m = \"ayb\", n = Sin[x], c = {\"a\", 77},
d = {\"a\", \"b\"}}"
Earlier it was already noted that certain functional facilities
of the Mathematica need to be reworked both for purpose of
expansion of domain of application, and elimination of certain
shortcomings. It to the full extent concerns such an important
enough function whose call ToString[x] returns the result of the
converting of an arbitrary expression x to the string format. The
standard function incorrectly converts expressions into string
format, that contain string subexpressions if to code them in the
standard way. By this reason we defined procedure ToString1
whose call ToString1[x] returns the result of correct converting
of an arbitrary expression x in the string format. The fragment
below represents source codes of the ToString1 procedure and
ToString1 function with examples of their use. In a number of
appendices these means is popular enough.
In[1]:= ToString1[x_] := Module[{a = "###", b = "", c, k = 1},
Write[a, x]; Close[a];
For[k, k < Infinity, k++, c = Read[a, String];
If[SameQ[c, EndOfFile], Return[DeleteFile[Close[a]]; b],
b = b <> StrDelEnds[c, " ", 1]]]]
In[2]:= K[x_] := Module[{a = "r", b = " = "}, a <> b <> ToString[x]]
In[3]:= ToString[Definition[K]]
Out[3]= "K[x_] := Module[{a = r, b = = }, a<>b<>ToString[x]]"
In[4]:= ToExpression[%]
ToExpression::sntx: Invalid syntax in or before "K[x_] :=
Module[{a = r, b = = }, a<>b<>ToString[x]]".
Out[4]= $Failed
In[5]:= ToString1[Definition[K]]
Out[5]= "K[x_] := Module[{a = \"r\", b = \" = \"},
StringJoin[a, b, ToString[x]]]"
In[6]:= ToExpression[%]
In[7]:= ToString1[x_] := {Write["#$#", x], Close["#$#"],
ReadString["#$#"], DeleteFile["#$#"]}[[–2]]
134
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
In[8]:= ToString1[Definition[K]]
Out[8]= "K[x_] := Module[{a = \"r\", b = \" = \"},
StringJoin[a, b, ToString[x]]]"
In[9]:= ToString2[x_] := Module[{a},
If[ListQ[x], SetAttributes[ToString1, Listable]; a = ToString1[x];
ClearAttributes[ToString1, Listable]; a, ToString1[x]]]
In[10]:= ToString2[{{77, 7}, {4, {a, b, {x, y}, c}, 5}, {30, 23}}]
Out[10]= {{"77", "7"}, {"4", {"a", "b", {"x", "y"}, "c"}, "5"}, {"30", "23"}}
In[11]:= ToString5[x_] := Module[{a, b, c, d}, a[b_] := x;
c = Definition1[a]; d = Flatten[StringPosition[c, " := ", 1]][[–1]];
StringTake[c, {d + 1, –1}]]
In[12]:= ToString5[{{a, b, "c", "d + h"}, "m", "p + d"}]
Out[12]= "{{a, b, \"c\", \"d + h\"}, \"m\", \"p + d\"}"
In[13]:= ToString1[{{a, b, "c", "d + h"}, "m", "p + d"}]
Out[13]= "{{a, b, \"c\", \"d + h\"}, \"m\", \"p + d\"}"
In[26]:= {a, b} = {72, 77};
In[27]:= ToString6[x_] := {Save["#", "a"], ClearAll["a"],
a = Unique["$"], a[t_] := x, a = Definition1[a],
StringTake[a, {Flatten[StringPosition[a, " := ", 1]][[–1]] + 1, –1}],
{Get["#"], DeleteFile["#"]}}[[–2]]
In[28]:= ToString6[{{c, d, "c", "d + h"}, "m", "p + d", "m/n"}]
Out[28]= "{{c, d, \"c\", \"d + h\"}, \"m\", \"p + d\", \"m/n\"}"
In[29]:= ToString1[{{c, d, "c", "d + h"}, "m", "p + d", "m/n"}]
Out[29]= "{{c, d, \"c\", \"d + h\"}, \"m\", \"p + d\", \"m/n\"}"
In[30]:= {a, b}
Out[30]= {72, 77}
In[46]:= Unique3[x_, n_] :=
Module[{a = Characters[ToString[x]], b},
b = Map[StringJoin, {Select[a, LetterQ[#] &], Select[a, DigitQ[#] &]}];
ToExpression[b[[1]] <> ToString[ToExpression[b[[2]]] – n]]]
In[47]:= Unique3[Unique["avz"], 7]
Out[47]= avz204
In[48]:= ToString7[x_] := {Unique3[Unique["g"], 0][t_] := x;
Unique3[Unique["g"], 0] = Definition1[Unique3[Unique["g"], 0]];
StringTake[Definition1[Unique3[Unique["g"], 3]],
{Flatten[StringPosition[Definition1[Unique3[Unique["g"], 4]],
" := ", 1]][[–1]] + 1, –1}]}[[1]]
135
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
In[49]:= ToString7[{{c, d, "c", "d + h"}, "m", "p + d", "m/n"}]
Out[49]= "{{c, d, \"c\", \"d + h\"}, \"m\", \"p + d\", \"m/n\"}"
In[50]:= ToString1[{{c, d, "c", "d + h"}, "m", "p + d", "m/n"}]
Out[50]= "{{c, d, \"c\", \"d + h\"}, \"m\", \"p + d\", \"m/n\"}"
Immediate application of the ToString1 procedure allows to
simplify rather significantly the programming of a lot of tasks.
In addition, examples of the previous fragment rather visually
illustrate application of both means on the concrete example
which emphases the advantages of our procedure. Whereas the
ToString2 procedure expands the previous procedure onto lists
of any level of nesting. So, the call ToString2[x] on an argument
x, different from list is equivalent to the call ToString1[x], while
on a list x is equivalent to the procedure call ToString1[x] that is
endowed with the Listable attribute. The call ToString3[j] serves
for converting of an expression j into the string InputForm form.
The function has a number of rather useful appendices. Whereas
the call ToString4[x] is analogous to the call ToString1[x] if x is
a symbol, otherwise string \"(\" <> ToString1[x] <> \")\" will be
returned. At last, the ToString5 procedure is a certain functional
analogue of the ToString1 procedure whose source code is based
on a different algorithm that does not use the file access. While
the ToString6 function is a functional analogue of the ToString5
procedure but with using of the file access. Meanwhile, using a
procedure whose call Unique3[Unique[x], n] returns the name
of a variable unique to the current session and which was earlier
generated by a Unique[x] call chain n steps before the current
time (the x argument is either a letter or a string from them in string
format) it is possible to program the ToString7 function in form
of the list which is equivalent to the above ToString1 procedure
and does not use the file access. With source codes of the above
7 tools with examples of their application the interested reader
can partially familiarize above and fully in [8,10-16]. Note, that
the tools StrStr, ToString1 ÷ ToString7 are rather useful enough
at processing of expressions in the string format.
A number of the important problems dealing with strings
processing do the SubsString procedure as a rather useful tool,
136
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
whose call SubsString[s, {a, b, c,…}] returns the list of substrings
of a string s which are limited by substrings {a, b, c,…}, whereas
the procedure call SubsString[s, {a, b, c, d, …}, p] with the third
optional p argument – a pure function in short format – returns the
list of substrings of the s string which are limited by substrings
{a, b, c, …}, meeting the condition defined by a pure p function.
Furthermore, the procedure call SubsString[s, {a, b, c, …}, p]
with the third optional p argument – any expression different from
pure function – returns the list of substrings limited by substrings
{a, b, c, …}, with removed prefixes and suffixes {a, b, c, d,…}[[1]]
and {a, b, c, d,…}[[–1]] accordingly. In absence in the string s of
at least one of substrings {a, b, c, d,…} the procedure call returns
the empty list. The following fragment represents source code
of the procedure with typical examples of its application.
In[80]:= SubsString[s_ /; StringQ[s], y_ /; ListQ[y], pf___] :=
Module[{a = "", b, c, k = 1},
If[Set[c, Length[y]] < 2, s, b = Map[ToString1, y];
While[k <= c – 1, a = a <> b[[k]] <> "~~ Shortest[__] ~~ "; k++];
a = a <> b[[–1]]; b = StringCases[s, ToExpression[a]];
If[{pf} != {} && PureFuncQ[pf], Select[b, pf],
If[{pf} != {}, Map[StringTake[#, {StringLength[y[[1]]] + 1,
–StringLength[y[[–1]]] – 1}] &, b], Select[b, StringQ[#] &]]]]]
In[81]:= SubsString["adfgbffgbavzgagngbArtggbKgrg",
{"b", "g"}, StringFreeQ[#, "f"] &]
Out[81]= {"bavzg", "bArtg", "bKg"}
In[82]:= SubsString["abcxx7xxx42345abcyy7yyy42345",
{"ab", "42"}, 590]
Out[82]= {"cxx7xxx", "cyy7yyy"}
On the other hand, the SubsString1 procedure is an useful
enough SubsString procedure extension, being of interest at the
programming of the problems connected with processing of the
strings too. The procedure call SubsString1[s, y, f, t] returns the
list of substrings of a string s that are limited by the substrings
of a list y; at that, if a testing pure function acts as f argument,
the returned list will contain only the substrings satisfying this
test. At that, at t = 1 the returned substrings are limited to ultra
137
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
substrings of the y list, whereas at t = 0 substrings are returned
without the limiting ultra substrings of the y list. At that, in the
presence of the 5th optional r argument – any expression – search
of substrings in the s string is done from right to left, that as a
whole simplifies algorithms of search of the required substrings.
With source code of the SubsString1 procedure and examples
of its use the interested reader can familiarize in [8,9,14-16].
For operating with strings the SubsDel procedure is a quite
certain interest whose call SubsDel[S, x, y, p] returns the result of
removal from a string S of all sub-strings that are limited on the
right (at the left) by a sub-string x and at the left (on the right) by
the first met symbol in string format from the y list; in addition,
search of y symbol is done to the left (p=-1) or to the right (p=1).
In addition, the deleted sub-strings will contain a sub-string x
since one end and the first symbol met from y since other end.
Moreover, if in the course of search the symbols from the y list
weren't found until end of the S string, the rest of initial S string
is removed. Fragment represents source code of the procedure
SubsDel with typical example of its application [8,16].
In[2321]:= SubsDel[S_ /; StringQ[S], x_ /; StringQ[x],
y_ /; ListQ[y] && AllTrue[Map[StringQ, y], TrueQ] &&
Plus[Sequences[Map[StringLength, y]]] == Length[y],
p_ /; MemberQ[{–1, 1}, p]] := Module[{b, c = x, d,
h = StringLength[S], k},
If[StringFreeQ[S, x], Return[S], b = StringPosition[S, x][[1]]];
For[k = If[p == 1, b[[2]] + 1, b[[1]] – 1], If[p == 1, k <= h, k >= 1],
If[p == 1, k++, k––], d = StringTake[S, {k, k}];
If[MemberQ[y, d] || If[p == 1, k == 1, k == h], Break[],
If[p == 1, c = c <> d, c = d <> c]; Continue[]]];
StringReplace[S, c –> ""]]
In[2322]:= SubsDel["12345avz6789", "avz", {"8", "5"}, 1]
Out[2322]= "1234589"
While the procedure call SubDelStr[x, t] provides removal
from a string x of all sub–strings which are limited by numbers
of the positions set by a list t of the ListList type from 2–element
138
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
sublists. On incorrect tuples of actual arguments the procedure
call is returned unevaluated. The following fragment represents
source code of the procedure and an example of its application.
In[28]:= SubDelStr[x_ /; StringQ[x], t_ /; ListListQ[t]] :=
Module[{k = 1, a = {}}, If[! t == Select[t, ListQ[#] &&
Length[#] == 2 &]||t[[–1]][[2]] > StringLength[x]||t[[1]][[1]] < 1,
Return[Defer[SubDelStr[x, t]]],
For[k, k <= Length[t], k++,AppendTo[a, StringTake[x, t[[k]]] –> ""]];
StringReplace[x, a]]]
In[29]:= SubDelStr["123456789abcdfdh", {{3, 5}, {7, 8}, {10, 12}}]
Out[29]= "1269dfdh"
Replacements and extractions in strings. In a number of
problems of strings processing, there is a need of replacement
not simply of substrings but substrings limited by the certain
substrings. The procedure solves one of such problems, its call
StringReplaceS[S, s1, s2] returns the result of substitution into a
S string instead of entries into it of substrings s1 limited by "x"
strings on the left and on the right from the specified lists L and
R respectively, by s2 substrings (StringLength["x"]=1); in a case
of absence of such entries the procedure call returns the S string.
The following fragment represents source code of the procedure
StringReplaceS with an example of its application.
In[3822]:= StringReplaceS[S_ /; StringQ[S], s1_ /; StringQ[s1],
s2_ /; StringQ[s2]] := Module[{a = StringLength[S],
L = Characters["`!@#%^&*(){}:\"\\/|<>?~–=+[];:'., 1234567890"],
R = Characters["`!@#%^&*(){}:\"\\/|<>?~=+[];:'., "], c = {}, k = 1,
p, b = StringPosition[S, s1]},
If[b == {}, S, While[k <= Length[b], p = b[[k]];
If[Quiet[(p[[1]] == 1 && p[[2]] == a) || (p[[1]] == 1 &&
MemberQ[R, StringTake[S, {p[[2]] + 1, p[[2]] + 1}]]) ||
(MemberQ[L, StringTake[S, {p[[1]] – 1, p[[1]] – 1}]] &&
MemberQ[R, StringTake[S, {p[[2]] + 1, p[[2]] + 1}]]) ||
(p[[2]] == a && MemberQ[L, StringTake[S, {p[[1]] – 1, p[[1]] – 1}]])],
c = Append[c, p]]; k++]; StringReplacePart[S, s2, c]]]
In[3823]:= S = "abc& c + bd6abc[abc] – abc77*xyz^abc&78";
StringReplaceS[S, "abc", "xyz"]
139
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
Out[3823]= "xyz& c + bd6xyz[xyz] – abc77*xyz^xyz&78"
The above procedure, in particular, is a rather useful tool at
processing of definitions of blocks and modules in respect of the
operating with their formal arguments and local variables [14].
In a number of cases at strings processing it is necessary to
extract from them the substrings limited by the symbol {"}, i.e.
"strings in strings". This problem is solved by the procedure,
whose call StrFromStr[x] returns the list of such substrings that
are in a string x; otherwise, the call StrFromStr[x] returns the
empty list, i.e. {}. The fragment below represents source code of
the procedure along with a typical example of its application.
In[11]:= StrFromStr[x_String] := Module[{a = "\"", b, c = {}, k = 1},
b = DeleteDuplicates[Flatten[StringPosition[x, a]]];
For[k, k <= Length[b] – 1, k++,
AppendTo[c, ToExpression[StringTake[x, {b[[k]], b[[k + 1]]}]]];
k = k + 1]; c]
In[12]:= StrFromStr["12345\"678abc\"xyz\"50090\"mnph"]
Out[12]= {"678abc", "50090"}
To the above procedure an useful UniformString function
adjoins. The strings can contain the substrings bounded by "\""
in particular the cdf/nb–files in the string format. To make such
strings by uniform, the simple function UniformString is used.
The call UniformString[x] returns a string x in the uniform form,
whereas the call UniformString[x, y], where y is an expression
returns the list of substrings of the x string which are bounded
by "\"". The following fragment represents source code of the
UniformString function with examples of its application.
In[4]:= UniformString[x_ /; StringQ[x], y___] :=
If[{y} == {}, StringReplace[x, "\"" –> ""],
Map[StringReplace[#, "\"" –> ""] &,
StringCases[x, Shortest["\"" ~~ __ ~~ "\""]]]]
In[5]:= UniformString["{\"ClearValues\", \"::\", \"usage\"}"]
Out[5]= "{ClearValues, ::, usage}"
In[6]:= UniformString["{\"ClearValues\", \"::\", \"usage\"}", 7]
Out[6]= {"ClearValues", "::", "usage"}
The above function is a rather useful tool at processing of
140
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
the string representation of cdf/nb–files which is based on their
internal formats [14,22]. Unlike standard StringSplit function,
the call StringSplit1[x, y] performs semantic splitting of a string
x by symbol y onto elements of the returned list. The semantics
is reduced to the point that in the returned list only substrings
of the x string which contain the correct expressions are placed;
in a case of lack of such substrings the procedure call returns the
empty list. The StringSplit1 procedure appears as a rather useful
tool, in particular at programming of tools of processing of the
headings of blocks, functions and modules. The comparative
analysis of the StringSplit and StringSplit1 tools speaks well for
that. Fragment below represents source code of the StringSplit1
procedure along with typical examples of its application.
In[7]:= StringSplit1[x_ /; StringQ[x], y_ /; StringQ[y] ||
StringLength[y] == 1] :=
Module[{a = StringSplit[x, y], b, c = {}, d, p, k = 1, j = 1},
d = Length[a]; Label[G]; For[k = j, k <= d, k++, p = a[[k]];
If[! SameQ[Quiet[ToExpression[p]], $Failed], AppendTo[c, p],
b = a[[k]]; For[j = k, j <= d – 1, j++, b = b <> y <> a[[j + 1]];
If[! SameQ[Quiet[ToExpression[b]], $Failed], AppendTo[c, b];
Goto[G], Null]]]]; Map[StringTrim, c]]
In[8]:= StringSplit1["x_String, y_Integer, z_/; FreeQ[{1, 2, 3, 4}, z]
||OddQ[z], h_, s_String, c_ /; StringQ[c]||StringLength[c] == 1", ","]
Out[8]= {"x_String", "y_Integer", "z_/; FreeQ[{1, 2, 3, 4}, z] ||
OddQ[z]", "h_", "s_String", "c_ /; StringQ[c]||StringLength[c] == 1"}
Substrings processing in strings. At substrings processing
in strings is often need of check of existence fact of substrings
overlaping that entere to the strings. The call SubStrOverlapQ[x,y]
returns True, if a string x contains overlapping substrings y or
substrings from x matching the general string expression y, and
False otherwise. While the call SubStrOverlapQ[x, y, z] through
optional z argument – an indefinite symbol – additionally returns
the list of consecutive quantities of overlapings of the y sublist
in the x string. The following fragment represents source code
of the function with typical examples of its application.
In[7]:= SubStrOverlapQ[x_ /; StringQ[x], y_, z___] :=
141
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
MemberQ[{If[{z} != {} && NullQ[z], z = {}, 77],
Map[If[Length[#] == 1, True,
If[! NullQ[z], Quiet[AppendTo[z, Length[#]]], 78]; False] &,
Split[StringPosition[x, y],
MemberQ[Range[#1[[1]] + 1, #1[[2]]], #2[[1]]] &]]}[[2]], False]
In[8]:= {SubStrOverlapQ["dd1dd1ddaaaabcdd1d1dd1dd1dd1\
dd1aaaaaadd1", "aa", g1], g1}
Out[8]= {True, {3, 5}}
In[9]:= {SubStrOverlapQ["AAABBBBBAABABBBBCCCBAA\
AAAA", x_ ~~ x_, g2], g2}
Out[9]= {True, {2, 4, 3, 2, 5}}
The procedure SubStrSymbolParity represents undoubted
interest at processing of definitions of functions or procedures
given in the string format. The call SubStrSymbolParity[x,y,z,d]
with four arguments returns the list of substrings of a string x
that are limited by one–character strings y, z (y ≠ z); in addition,
search of such substrings in the string x is done from left to right
(d = 0), and from right to left (d = 1). Whereas the procedure call
SubStrSymbolParity[x,y,z,d,t] with the 5th optional argument –
a positive number t > 0 – provides search in a substring of x which
is limited by a position t and the end of x string at d = 0, and by
the beginning of x string and t at d = 1. In a case of receiving of
inadmissible arguments the call is returned unevaluated, while
at impossibility of extraction of demanded substrings the call
returns $Failed. This procedure is an useful tool, in particular, at
solution of tasks of extraction from definitions of procedures of
the list of local variables, headings, etc. The following fragment
represents source code of the SubStrSymbolParity procedure
with typical examples of its application.
In[5]:= SubStrSymbolParity[x_ /; StringQ[x], y_ /; CharacterQ[y],
z_ /; CharacterQ[z], d_ /; MemberQ[{0, 1}, d], t___ /; t == {} ||
PosIntQ[{t}[[1]]]] :=
Module[{a, b = {}, c = {y, z}, k = 1, j, f, m = 1, n = 0, p, h},
If[{t} == {}, f = x, f = StringTake[x,
If[d == 0, {t, StringLength[x]}, {1, t}]]];
If[Map10[StringFreeQ, f, c] != {False, False} || y == z, Return[],
a = StringPosition[f, If[d == 0, c[[1]], c[[2]]]]];
142
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
For[k, k <= Length[a], k++,
j = If[d == 0, a[[k]][[1]] + 1, a[[k]][[2]] – 1];
h = If[d == 0, y, z]; While[m != n,
p = Quiet[Check[StringTake[f, {j, j}], Return[$Failed]]];
If[p == y, If[d == 0, m++, n++];
If[d == 0, h = h <> p, h = p <> h], If[p == z, If[d == 0, n++, m++];
If[d == 0, h = h <> p, h = p <> h],
If[d == 0, h = h <> p, h = p <> h]]];
If[d == 0, j++, j––]]; AppendTo[b, h]; m = 1; n = 0; h = ""]; b]
In[6]:= SubStrSymbolParity["123{abcdf}7{ran}8{ian}9", "{", "}", 0]
Out[6]= {"{abcdf}", "{ran}", "{ian}"}
In[7]:= SubStrSymbolParity["12{abf}6{ran}8{ian}9", "{", "}", 1, 25]
Out[7]= {"{abf}", "{rans}"}
Meantime, in many cases it is possible to use a simpler and
reactive version of the above procedure, whose procedure call
SubStrSymbolParity1[x, y, z] with three arguments returns the
list of substrings of a string x that are limited by one-character
strings {y,z} (y ≠ z); in addition, search of such substrings is done
from left to right. In the absence of the required substrings the
procedure call returns the empty list, i.e. {}. A simple procedure
is an useful enough modification of the SubStrSymbolParity1
procedure; its call StrSymbParity[S, s, x, y] returns the list whose
elements are substrings of a string S which have format s1w on
condition of parity of the minimum number of entries into a w
substring of symbols x, y (x ≠ y). In the lack of such substrings or
identity of symbols x, y, the call returns the empty list [16]. The
SubStrSymbolParity, SubStrSymbolParity1 and StrSymbParity
procedures are rather useful tools, for instance, at processing of
definitions of modules and blocks given in string format. These
procedures are used by a number of tools of our MathToolBox
package [8-12,15,16].
The procedure below is a rather useful tool for ensuring of
converting of strings of a certain structure into lists of strings.
In particular, such problems arise at processing of arguments
and local variables. The problem is solved a rather effectively by
the StrToList procedure, providing converting of strings of the
"{xxxxxxxxx … x}" format into the list of strings received from a
143
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
"xxxxx … x" string parted by comma symbols. In absence in an
initial string of both limiting symbols {"{", "}"} the string will be
converted in list of symbols as a call Characters["xxx…x"]. The
next fragment presents source code of the StrToList procedure
with examples of its application.
In[8]:= StrToList[x_ /; StringQ[x]] := Module[{a, b = {}, c = {}, d,
h, k = 1, j, y = If[StringTake[x, {1}] == "{" &&
StringTake[x, {–1}] == "}", StringTake[x, {2, –2}], x]},
a = DeleteDuplicates[Flatten[StringPosition[y, "="]] + 2];
d = StringLength[y];
If[a == {}, Map[StringTrim, StringSplit[y, ","]],
While[k <= Length[a], c = ""; j = a[[k]];
For[j, j <= d, j++, c = c <> StringTake[y, {j}];
If[! SameQ[Quiet[ToExpression[c]], $Failed] &&
(j == d || StringTake[x, {j + 1}] == ","),
AppendTo[b, c –> ToString[Unique[$g$]]]; Break[]]]; k++];
h = Map[StringTrim, StringSplit[StringReplace[y, b], ","]];
Map14[StringReplace, h, RevRules1[b]]]]
In[9]:= StrToList["Kr, a = 90, b = {x, y, z}, c = {n, m, {42, 47, 67}}"]
Out[9]= {"Kr", "a = 90", "b = {x, y, z}", "c = {n, m, {42, 47, 67}}"}
In[10]:= StrToList["{a = 500, b = 90, c = {m, n}}"]
Out[10]= {"a = 500", "b = 90", "c = {m, n}"}
The above procedure is intended for converting of strings
of format "{x…x}" or "x…x" into the list of strings received from
strings of the specified format which are parted by symbols "="
and/or comma. Fragment examples an quite visually illustrate
the basic principle of performance of the procedure along with
formats of the returned results. At last, the fragment uses quite
simple and useful procedure, whose call RevRules[x] returns
the rule or list of rules that are reverse to the rules defined by a
x argument – a rule of form a –> b or their list [16]. The procedure
can be also represented in the functional form, namely:
In[3327]:= RevRules1[x_ /; RuleQ[x] || ListQ[x] &&
AllTrue[Map[RuleQ, x], TrueQ]] := Map[Rule[#[[2]], #[[1]]] &,
Flatten[{x}]][[If[Length[Flatten[{x}]] > 1, 1 ;; Length[Flatten[{x}]], 1]]]
In[3328]:= RevRules1[{a –> b, c –> d, n –> m}]
Out[3328]= {b –> a, d –> c, m –> n}
144
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
Note, that the RevRules1 function is essentially used by the
above StrToList procedure.
The following procedure is a rather useful means of strings
processing in a case when it is required to identify in a string of
occurrence of substrings of kind "abc…n" and "abc…np", p – a
character. The procedure call SubsInString[x, y, z] returns 0, if
substrings y and y<>z where y – a string and z – a character are
absent in a string x; 1, if x contains y and not contain y <> z; 2, if
x contains y <> z and not contain y, and three otherwise, i.e. the
x string contains both y and y <> z [8,9]. Whereas the procedure
call CorrSubStrings[x, n, y] returns the list of substrings of string
x that contain all formally correct expressions, at the same time,
search is done beginning with n–th position of the x string from
left to right if the third optional y argument is absent, and from
right to left if the y argument – any expression – exists. Fragment
represents source code of the CorrSubStrings procedure and an
example of its typical application.
In[7]:= CorrSubStrings[x_ /; StringQ[x], n_ /; PosIntQ[n], y___] :=
Module[{a = {}, b = StringLength[x], c = ""},
If[{y} != {}, Do[If[SyntaxQ[Set[c, StringTake[x, {j}] <> c]],
AppendTo[a, c], 7], {j, n, 1, –1}],
Do[If[SyntaxQ[Set[c, c <> StringTake[x, {j}]]],
AppendTo[a, c], 7], {j, n, b}]]; a]
In[8]:= CorrSubStrings["(a+b/x^2)/(c/x^3+d/y^2)+1/z^3", 29, 2]
Out[8]= {"3", "z^3", "1/z^3", "+1/z^3", "(c/x^3+d/y^2)+1/z^3",
"(a+b/x^2)/(c/x^3+d/y^2)+1/z^3"}
In a number of cases there is a necessity of reducing to the
set number of the quantity of entries into a string of its adjacent
substrings. That problem is solved by the ReduceAdjacentStr
procedure presented by the following fragment. The procedure
call ReduceAdjacentStr[x, y, n] returns the string – the result of
reducing to an quantity n ≥ 0 of occurrences into a string x of its
adjacent y substrings. If a string x not contain y substrings, then
the call returns the initial x string; the call ReduceAdjacentStr[x,
y, n, h] where h – an arbitrary expression, returns the above result
on condition that at search of the y substrings in the x string the
145
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
lowercase and uppercase letters are identified.
In[41]:= ReduceAdjacentStr[x_ /; StringQ[x], y_ /; StringQ[y],
n_ /; IntegerQ[n], z___] := Module[{a = {}, b = {},
c = Append[StringPosition[x <> FromCharacterCode[0], y,
IgnoreCase –> If[{z} != {}, True, False]], {0, 0}], h, k},
If[c == {}, x, Do[If[c[[k]][[2]] + 1 == c[[k + 1]][[1]],
b = Union[b, {c[[k]], c[[k + 1]]}], b = Union[b, {c[[k]]}];
a = Union[a, {b}]; b = {}], {k, 1, Length[c] – 1}];
a = Select[a, Length[#] >= n &];
a = Map[Quiet[Check[{#[[1]], #[[–1]]}, Nothing]] &,
Map[Flatten, Map[#[[–Length[#] + n ;; –1]] &, a]]];
StringReplacePart[x, "", a]]]
In[42]:= ReduceAdjacentStr["abababcdcdxmnabmabab", "ab", 3]
Out[42]= "abababcdcdxmnabmabab"
In contrast to the LongestCommonSubsequence function the
procedure call LongestCommonSubsequence1[x, y, J] in a mode
IgnoreCase –>J∈{True,False} finds the longest contiguous substrings
that are common to the strings x and y. Whereas the procedure
call LongestCommonSubsequence1[x,y,J,t] additionally through
an undefinite t variable returns the list of all common contiguous
substrings. The procedure essentially uses the procedure whose
call Intersection1[x,y,z,…,J] returns the list of elements common
to all lists of strings in the mode IgnoreCase –>J∈
∈{True,False}. The
fragment below represents source codes of both procedures and
typical examples of their application.
In[6]:= LongestCommonSubsequence1[x_ /; StringQ[x],
y_ /; StringQ[y], Ig_ /; MemberQ[{False, True}, Ig], t___] :=
Module[{a = Characters[x], b = Characters[y], c, d, f},
f[z_, h_] := Map[If[StringFreeQ[h, #], Nothing, #] &,
Map[StringJoin[#] &, Subsets[z]][[2 ;; –1]]];
c = Gather[d = Sort[If[Ig == True, Intersection1[f[a, x], f[b, y], Ig],
Intersection[f[a,x], f[b,y]]], StringLength[#1] <= StringLength[#2] &],
StringLength[#1] == StringLength[#2] &];
If[{t} != {} && ! HowAct[t], t = d, Null]; c = If[c == {}, {}, c[[–1]]];
If[c == {}, {}, If[Length[c] == 1, c[[1]], c]]]
In[7]:= {LongestCommonSubsequence1["AaAaBaCBbBaCaccccC",
146
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
"CacCCbbbAaABaBa", False, gs], gs}
Out[7]= {{"AaA", "aBa", "Cac"}, {"a", "A", "b", "B", "c", "C", "aA",
"Aa", "aB", "ac", "Ba", "Ca", "cC", "AaA", "aBa", "Cac"}}
In[8]:= {LongestCommonSubsequence1["Rans", "Ian", True, j], j}
Out[8]= {"an", {"a", "n", "an"}}
In[9]:= Intersection1[x__ /; AllTrue[Map[ListQ[#] &, {x}], TrueQ],
Ig_ /; MemberQ[{False, True}, Ig]] :=
Module[{b = Length[{x}], c = {}, d = {}},
Do[AppendTo[c, Map[StringQ, {x}[[j]]]], {j, 1, b}];
If[DeleteDuplicates[Flatten[c]] != {True}, $Failed,
If[Ig == False, Intersection[x], Do[AppendTo[d,
Map[{j, #, ToUpperCase[ToString[#]]} &, {x}[[j]]]], {j, 1, b}];
c = Map[DeleteDuplicates,
Gather[Flatten[Join[d], 1], #1[[3]] == #2[[3]] &]];
c = Flatten[Select[c, Length[#] >= b &], 1];
c = If[DeleteDuplicates[Map[#[[1]] &, c]] != Range[1, b], {},
DeleteDuplicates[Map[#[[2]] &, c]]]]]]
In[10]:= Intersection1[{"AB", "XY", "cd", "Mn"}, {"ab", "cD", "MN",
"pq", "mN"}, {"90", "mn", "Ag"}, {"500", "mn", "Av"}, True]
Out[10]= {"Mn", "MN", "mN", "mn"}
The LongestCommonSubsequence2 procedure is a certain
extension of the LongestCommonSubsequence1 procedure for a
case of a finite number of strings in which the search for longest
common continuous substrings is done [8,11,14-16].
In[317]:= LongestCommonSubsequence2["ABxCDH", "ABxC",
"ABxCDCABCdc", "xyzABXC", "xyzABxC", "mnpABxC", True]
Out[317]= {"ABxC", "ABXC"}
For work with strings the following procedure is a rather
useful, whose call InsertN[S, L, n] returns the result of inserting
into a string S after its positions from a list n of substrings from
a list L; in a case n = {< 1|≥ StringLength[S]} a substring will be
located before S string or in its end respectively. It is supposed
that the actual arguments L and n may contain various number
of elements, in such case the excess n elements are ignored. At
that, processing of a string S is carried out concerning the list of
positions for m insertions defined according to the relation m =
DeleteDuplicates[Sort[n]]. The procedure call InsertN[S, L, n]
147
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
with inadmissible arguments is returned as unevaluated. The
procedure was used significantly in programming a number of
MathToolBox package tools [16]. The next fragment represents
source code of the procedure with examples of its application.
In[2220]:= InsertN[S_String, L_ /; ListQ[L], n_ /; ListQ[n] &&
Length[n] == Length[Select[n, IntegerQ[#] &]]] :=
Module[{a = Map[ToString, L], d = Characters[S], p, b, k = 1,
c = FromCharacterCode[2], m = DeleteDuplicates[Sort[n]]},
b = Map[c <> ToString[#] &, Range[1, Length[d]]];
b = Riffle[d, b]; p = Min[Length[a], Length[m]];
While[k <= p, If[m[[k]] < 1, PrependTo[b, a[[k]]],
If[m[[k]] > Length[d], AppendTo[b, a[[k]]],
b = ReplaceAll[b, c <> ToString[m[[k]]] –> a[[k]]]]]; k++];
StringJoin[Select[b, ! SuffPref[#, c, 1] &]]]
In[2221]:= InsertN["123456789Rans_Ian", {Ag, Vs, Art, Kr},
{6, 9, 3, 0, 3, 17}]
Out[2221]= "Ag123Vs456Art789KrRans_Ian"
In[2222]:= InsertN["123456789", {a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h, n, m},
{4, 2, 3, 0, 17, 9, 18}]
Out[2222]= "a12b3c4d56789efg"
Contrary to the InsertN procedure the call of the procedure
DelSubStr[S, L] provides removal from a string S of substrings,
whose positions are set by a list L; the L list has nesting 0 or 1,
for example, {{3, 4}, {7}, {9}} or {1, 3, 5, 7, 9}, whereas the function
call AddDelPosString[x, y, h, z] returns the result of truncation of
a string x to the substring x[[1 ;; y]] if z – an arbitrary expression
and x[[y ;; –1]] if {z} == {} with replacing of the deleted substring
by a string h. In a case of an incorrect value y the call returns the
initial x string or is returned unevaluated [16]. Both these tools
are rather useful in a number of problems of strings processing
of various structure and appointment.
The following procedure provides extraction from string of
continuous substrings of length bigger than 1. The procedure call
ContinuousSubs[x] returns the nested list whose elements have
format {s, {p11, p12},…,{pn1, pn2}} where s – a substring and {pj1,
pj2} (j = 1..n) determine the first and last positions of copies of a
continuous s substring that compose a string x. The procedure
148
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
uses an auxiliary tool – the SplitIntegerList procedure whose
call SplitIntegerList[x] returns the result of splitting of a strictly
increasing x list of the IntegerList type into sublists consisting of
strictly increasing tuples of integers. In addition, the procedure
SplitIntegerList has other useful applications too [9,10-16].
In[6]:= ContinuousSubs[x_ /; StringQ[x]] := Module[{a},
a = Select[DeleteDuplicates[Map[StringPosition[x, #] &,
Characters[x]]], Length[#] > 1 &];
a = Map[DeleteDuplicates, Map[Flatten, a]];
a = Map[SplitIntegerList, a];
a = Select[Flatten[a, 1], Length[#] > 1 &];
a = Map[{StringTake[x, {#[[1]], #[[–1]]}], {#[[1]], #[[–1]]}} &, a];
a = Gather[Sort[a, #[[1]] &], #1[[1]] === #2[[1]] &];
a = Map[If[Length[#] == 1, #[[1]], DeleteDuplicates[Flatten[#, 1]]] &, a];
SortBy[a, First]]
In[7]:= ContinuousSubs["abbbssccchggxxx66xxggazzzaaabbbssz7"]
Out[7]= {{"66", {16, 17}}, {"aaa", {26, 28}}, {"bbb", {2, 4}, {29, 31}},
{"ccc", {7, 9}}, {"gg", {11, 12}, {20, 21}}, {"ss", {5, 6}, {32, 33}},
{"xx", {18, 19}}, {"xxx", {13, 15}}, {"zzz", {23, 25}}}
The procedure call SolidSubStrings[x] returns the nested
list whose the first elements of 2–element sublists define solid
substrings of a string x which consist of identical characters in
quantity > 1, while the second elements define their counts in
the x string. In a case of lack of similar solid substrings the call
returns the empty list, i.e. {}.
In[19]:= SolidSubStrings[x_ /; StringQ[x]] :=
Module[{a = DeleteDuplicates[Characters[x]], b, c={}, d=x, n=1},
b = Map["[" <> # <> "–" <> # <> "]+" &, a];
b = Map[Sort, Map[StringCases[x, RegularExpression[#]] &, b]];
b = Reverse[Sort[DeleteDuplicates[Flatten[Map[Select[#,
StringLength[#] > 1 &] &, b]]]]];
Do[AppendTo[c, StringCount[d, b[[j]]]];
d = StringReplace[d, b[[j]] –> ""], {j, 1, Length[b]}];
Sort[Map[{#, c[[n++]]} &, b], OrderedQ[{#1[[1]], #2[[1]]}] &]]
In[20]:= SolidSubStrings["cccabaacdaammddddpphaaaaaccaaa"]
Out[20]= {{"aa", 2}, {"aaa", 1}, {"aaaaa", 1}, {"cc", 1}, {"ccc", 1},
{"dddd", 1}, {"mm", 1}, {"pp", 1}}
149
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
In particular, the SubsStrLim procedure represents an quite
certain interest for a number of appendices which significantly
use procedure of extraction from the strings of substrings of an
quite certain format. The next fragment represents source code
of the SubsStrLim procedure and typical examples of its use.
In[1942]:= SubsStrLim[x_ /; StringQ[x], y_ /; StringQ[y] &&
StringLength[y] == 1, z_ /; StringQ[z] && StringLength[z] == 1] :=
Module[{a, b = x <> FromCharacterCode[6], c = y, d = {}, p, j,
k = 1, n, h}, If[! StringFreeQ[b, y] &&
! StringFreeQ[b, z], a = StringPosition[b, y];
n = Length[a]; For[k, k <= n, k++, p = a[[k]][[1]]; j = p;
While[h = Quiet[StringTake[b, {j + 1}]]; h != z, c = c <> h; j++];
c = c <> z; If[StringFreeQ[StringTake[c, {2, –2}], {y, z}],
AppendTo[d, c]]; c = y]];
Select[d, StringFreeQ[#, FromCharacterCode[6]] &]]
In[1944]:= SubsStrLim[DefOpt["SubsStrLim"], "{", "}"]
Out[1944]= {"{}", "{j + 1}", "{2, –2}", "{y, z}"}
In[1945]:= SubsStrLim[Definition2["DefOpt"][[1]], "{", "}"]
Out[1945]= {"{a = If[SymbolQ[x], If[SystemQ[x], b = \"Null\",
ToString1[Definition[x]], \"Null\"]], b, c}"}
The call SubsStrLim[x, y, z] returns the list of substrings of
a string x that are limited by symbols {y, z} provided that these
symbols don't belong to these substrings, excepting their ends.
In particular, the SubsStrLim procedure is a quite useful means
at need of extracting from definitions of the functions, blocks or
modules given in the string format of certain components that
compose them which are limited by certain symbols, at times,
significantly simplifying a number of procedures of processing
of such definitions. Whereas the procedure call SubsStrLim1[x,
y, z] which is an useful enough modification of the SubsStrLim
procedure, returns list of substrings of x string that are limited
by symbols {y, z} provided that these symbols or don't enter in
substrings, excepting their ends, or along with their ends have
identical number of entries of pairs {y, z}, for example:
In[1947]:= SubsStrLim1["G[x_] := Block[{a = 7, b = 50, c = 900},
(a^2 + b^3 + c^4)*x]", "{", "}"]
Out[1947]= {"{a = 7, b = 50, c = 900}"}
150
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
The next means are useful at work with string structures.
The procedure call StringPat[x, y] returns the string expression
formed by strings of a list x and objects {"_", "__", "___"}; the call
returns x if x – a string. The procedure call StringCases1[x, y, z]
returns the list of the substrings in a string x that match a string
expression, created by the call StringPat[x, y]. While a function
call StringFreeQ1[x, y, z] returns True if no substring in x string
matches a string expression, created by the call StringPat[x, y],
and False otherwise. In the fragment below, source codes of the
above tools with examples of their applications are presented.
In[87]:= StringPat[x_ /; StringQ[x] || ListStringQ[x],
y_ /; MemberQ[{"_", "__", "___"}, y]]:= Module[{a = "", b},
If[StringQ[x], x, b = Map[ToString1, x];
ToExpression[StringJoin[Map[# <> "~~" <> y <> "~~" &,
b[[1 ;; –2]]], b[[–1]]]]]]
In[88]:= StringPat[{"ab", "df", "k"}, "__"]
Out[88]= "ab" ~~ __ ~~ "df" ~~ __ ~~ "k"
In[89]:= StringFreeQ1[x_ /; StringQ[x], y_ /; StringQ[y] ||
ListStringQ[y], z_ /; MemberQ[{"_", "__", "___"}, z]] :=
If[StringQ[y], StringFreeQ[x, y],
If[StringCases1[x, y, z] == {}, True, False]]
In[90]:= StringFreeQ1["abcfghkaactabcfghkt", {"ab", "df", "k"}, "___"]
Out[90]= True
In[91]:= StringCases2[x_ /; StringQ[x], y_ /; ListQ[y] && y != {}] :=
Module[{a, b = "", c = Map[ToString, y]},
Do[b = b <> ToString1[c[[k]]] <> "~~__~~", {k, 1, Length[c]}];
a = ToExpression[StringTake[b, {1, -7}]]; StringCases[x, Shortest[a]]]
In[92]:= StringCases2["a1234b7890000c5a b ca1b2c3", {a, b, c}]
Out[92]= {"a1234b7890000c", "a b c", "a1b2c"}
Whereas the call StringCases2[x, y] returns a list of disjoint
substrings in a string x that match the string expression of the
format Shortest[j1~~__~~j2 ~~__~~…~~__~~jk], where y = {j1,
j2, …, jk} and y is different from the empty list, i.e. {}. The above
tools are essentially used by a number of means of the package
MathToolBox, enough frequently essentially improving the
programming algorithms which deal with string expressions.
151
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
The following procedure along with independent interest
appears as a rather useful tool, e.g., in a case of computer study
of questions of the reproducibility of finite subconfigurations in
1-dimensional cellular automata (CA) models. The procedure call
StringEquiQ[x,y,n] returns True if strings x and y differ no more
than in n positions, and False otherwise. At that, in the presence
of the fifth optional z argument – an undefinite symbol – through
it the message "Strings lengths aren't equal", if lengths of strings
x and y are different, or the nested list {{n1, {x1, y1}}, {n2, {x2, y2}},
…, {np, {xp, yp}}} are returned whose 2–element sublists define
respectively numbers of positions (nj), characters of a string x
(xj) and characters of a string y (yj) which differ in nj positions
(j = 1..p). It must be kept in mind that the 4th argument r defines
the string comparison mode – lowercase and uppercase letters
are considered as different (r=True), or lowercase and uppercase
letters are considered as equivalent (r=False). The next fragment
represents the source code of the StringEquiQ procedure with
typical examples of its application.
In[7]:= StringEquiQ[x_ /; StringQ[x], y_ /; StringQ[y],
n_ /; IntegerQ[n], r_: True, z___] := Module[{c = {}, d, m, p, x1, y1,
a = StringLength[x], b = StringLength[y]},
If[{z} != {} && ! HowAct[z], d = 77, Null];
If[r === True, x1 = x; y1 = y, x1 = ToLowerCase[x];
y1 = ToLowerCase[y]];
If[x1 == y1, True, If[a != b,
If[d == 77, z = "Strings are`t equal in lengths", Null]; False,
{m, p} = Map[Characters, {x1, y1}];
Do[If[m[[j]] != p[[j]], AppendTo[c, {j, {StringTake[x, {j}],
StringTake[y, {j}]}}], Null], {j, 1, a}];
If[d == 77, z = c, Null]; If[Length[c] > n, False, True]]]]
In[8]:= StringEquiQ["Grsu_2018", "Grsu_2019", 2, False, v42]
Out[8]= True
In[9]:= v42
Out[9]= {{9, {"8", "9"}}}
In[10]:= StringEquiQ["Grsu_2019", "Grsu_4247", 2, False, g47]
Out[10]= False
In[11]:= g47
152
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
Out[11]= {{6, {"2", "4"}}, {7, {"0", "2"}}, {8, {"1", "4"}}, {9, {"9", "7"}}}
At this point, we conclude the problem related to processing
of string expressions in the Mathematica whereas a rather large
number of other useful enough tools of this purpose developed
by us can be found in [4-16]. Our experience of use of the Maple
and Mathematica for programming of tools for operating with
string structures showed that standard tools of Maple by many
essential indicators yield to the tools of the same type of Math–
language. For problems of this type the Math-language appears
simpler not only in connection with more developed tools, but
also because the procedural and functional paradigm allows to
use the mechanism of the pure functions. The item represents a
number of tools expanding the built–in tools of system that are
oriented on work with string structures. These and other means
of this type are located in our package [16]. At that, their correct
use assumes that this package is loaded into the current session,
the need for which is due to the fact that many tools of package
together with built–in means, make substantial use of the tools
whose definitions are in the same package.
Expressions containing in strings. In a number of cases of
expressions processing the problem of excretion of one or other
type of expressions from strings is quite topical. In this relation
a certain interest the ExprOfStr procedure represents, whose
source code with examples of its use represents the following
fragment. The procedure call ExprOfStr[w, n, m, L] returns the
result of extraction from a string w limited by its n–th position
and the end, of the first correct expression provided that search
is done on the left (m = –1) / on the right (m = 1) from the given
position; at that, a symbol, next or previous behind the found
expression must belong to a list L. The call is returned in string
format; in a case of the absence of a correct expression $Failed is
returned while the procedure call on inadmissible arguments is
returned unevaluated.
In[7]:= ExprOfStr[x_ /; StringQ[x], n_ /; IntegerQ[n] && n > 0,
p_ /; MemberQ[{–1, 1}, p], L_ /; ListQ[L]] := Module[{a = "", b, k},
If[n >= StringLength[x], Return[Defer[ExprOfStr[x,n,p,L]]], Null];
153
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
For[k = n, If[p == –1, k >= 1, k <= StringLength[x]],
If[p == –1, k––, k++], If[p == –1, a = StringTake[x, {k}] <> a,
a = a <> StringTake[x, {k}]]; If[! SyntaxQ[a], Null,
If[If[p == –1, k == 1, k == StringLength[x]] ||
MemberQ[L, Quiet[StringTake[x, If[p == –1, {k – 1}, {k + 1}]]]],
Return[a], Null]]]; $Failed]
In[8]:= ExprOfStr["12345;F[(a+b)/(c+d)]; A_2019", 7, 1, {"^", ";"}]
Out[8]= "F[(a+b)/(c+d)]"
The ExprOfStr1 represents an useful enough modification
of the previous procedure; its call ExprOfStr1[x, n, p] returns a
substring of string x, that is minimum on length and in that a
boundary element is a symbol in n–th position of a string x that
contains a correct expression. At that, search of such substring
is done from n–th position to the right and until the end of the x
string (p = 1), and from the left from n–th position of x string to
the beginning of the string (p = –1). In a case of absence of such
substring the call returns $Failed, while on inadmissible factual
arguments the procedure call is returned unevaluated [10,16].
In a certain relation to the above procedures the ExtrExpr
procedure adjoins, whose the call ExtrExpr[S, n, m] returns the
omnifarious correct expressions in the string format which are
contained in a substring of a string S limited by positions with
numbers n and m. In a case of absence of correct expressions
the empty list is returned. The fragment below represents source
code of the ExprOfStr procedure with an example of its use.
In[6]:= ExtrExpr[S_ /; StringQ[S], n_ /; IntegerQ[n],
m_ /; IntegerQ[m]] := Module[{a = StringLength[S], b, c, h = {}, k, j},
If[! (1 <= m <= a && n <= m), {}, b = StringTake[S, {n, m}];
Do[Do[c = Quiet[StringTake[b, {j, m – n – k + 1}]];
If[ExpressionQ[c], AppendTo[h, c]; Break[], Null],
{k, 0, m – n + 1}], {j, 1, m – n}];
DeleteDuplicates[Select[Map[StringTrim2[#,
{"+", "–", " ", "_"}, 3] &, h], ! MemberQ[{"", " "}, #] &]]]]
In[7]:= ExtrExpr["z=(Sin[x*y]+Log[x])-F[x,y]; S[x_]:= x^2;", 4, 39]
Out[7]= {"Sin[x*y]+Log[x]", "in[x*y]+Log[x]", "n[x*y]+Log[x]",
"x*y", "y", "Log[x]", "og[x]", "g[x]", "x", "F[x,y]; S[x_]:= x^2",
154
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
"S[x_] := x^2", "x^2"}
Using procedures CorrSubStrings, RevRules, ExtrVarsOfStr,
SubsInString, StringReplaceVars, ToStringRational [8,16], it is
possible to offer one more tool of extraction from an expression
of all formally correct subexpressions which are contained in it.
The procedure call SubExprsOfExpr[x] returns the sorted list of
every possible formally correct subexpressions of an expression
x. Meantime, if x expression contains no undefinite symbols, the
procedure call returns the evaluated initial expression x.
In[14]:= SubExprsOfExpr[x_] := Module[{b, c, c1, d = {}, h, f,
p = 7000, a = StringReplace[ToStringRational[x], " " –> ""]},
b = StringLength[a]; c = ExtrVarsOfStr[a, 1];
If[c == {}, x, f = Select[c, ! StringFreeQ[a, # <> "["] &&
StringFreeQ[a, # <> "[["] &];
c1 = Map[# –> FromCharacterCode[p++] &, c];
h = StringReplaceVars[a, c1];
Do[AppendTo[d, CorrSubStrings[h, j]], {j, 1, b}];
d = Map[StringTrim[#, ("+" | "–") ...] &, Flatten[d]];
d = Map[StringReplaceVars[#, RevRules[c1]] &, d];
Do[Set[d, Map[If[MemberQ[{0, 2}, SubsInString[#, f[[j]], "["]], #,
Nothing] &, d]], {j, 1, Length[f]}];
Sort[DeleteDuplicates[ToExpression[d]]]]]
In[15]:= SubExprsOfExpr[(a + bc)*Log[z]/(c + Sin[x])]
Out[15]= {a, bc, a + bc, c, x, z, Log[z], (a + bc)*Log[z], Sin[x],
((a + bc)*Log[z])/(c + Sin[x]), c + Sin[x]}
Three ExtrVarsOfStr ÷ ExtrVarsOfStr2 procedures are of interest
in extracting variables from strings. In particular, the procedure call
ExtrVarsOfStr2[S, t] returns the sorted list of variables in the string
format that managed to extract from a string S; at the absence of the
similar variables the empty list, i.e. {} is returned. While the procedure
call ExtrVarsOfStr2[S,t,x] with the third optional x argument – the list
of strings of length 1 – returns the list of the variables of S on condition
that at the above extracting, the elements from x list are not ignored.
The following fragment represents source code of the ExtrVarsOfStr2
procedure with typical examples of its application.
In[7]:= ExtrVarsOfStr2[S_ /; StringQ[S], x___ /; If[{x} == {}, True,
ListQ[x]]] := Module[{k, j, d = {}, p, a, q = Map[ToString, Range[0, 9]],
155
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
h = 1, c = "", L = Characters["`!@#%^&*(){}:\"\\/|<>?~–=+[];:'.,
1234567890_"], R = Characters["`!@#%^&*(){}:\"\\/|<>?~–=+[];:'., _"],
s = "," <> S <> ","}, a = StringLength[s];
If[{x} == {}, 7, {L, R} = Map[Select[#, ! MemberQ[x, #] &] &, {L, R}]];
Label[Gs]; For[k = h, k <= a, k++, p = StringTake[s, {k}];
If[! MemberQ[L, p], c = c <> p; j = k + 1;
While[j <= a, p = StringTake[s, {j}];
If[! MemberQ[R, p], c = c <> p, AppendTo[d, c];
h = j; c = ""; Goto[Gs]]; j++]]];
AppendTo[d, c]; d = Select[d, ! MemberQ[q, #] &];
d = Select[Map[StringReplace[#, {"+" –> "", "-" –> "", "_" –> ","}] &,
d], # != "" &]; d = Flatten[Select[d, ! StringFreeQ[s, #] &]];
Sort[DeleteDuplicates[Flatten[Map[StringSplit[#, ", "] &, d]]]]]
In[8]:= ExtrVarsOfStr2["(a*#1 + b*#2)/(c*#3 - i*#4) + j*#1*#4", {"#"}]
Out[8]= {"#1", "#2", "#3", "#4", "a", "b", "c", "i", "j"}
In[9]:= ExtrVarsOfStr2["(a*#1 + b*#2)/(c*#3 – d*#4) + m*#1*#4"]
Out[9]= {"a", "b", "c", "d", "m"}
The VarsInExpr procedure presents a rather useful version
of the ExtrVarsOfStr ÷ ExtrVarsOfStr2 procedures. Procedure
call VarsInExpr[x] returns the sorted list of variables in string
format, that managed to extract from an expression x; in a case
of absence of such variables the empty list is returned. At that,
it is supposed that the expression x can be encoded in the string
format, i.e. in ToString[InputForm[x]]. The fragment represents
source code of the VarsInExpr procedure and examples of its use.
In[151]:= VarsInExpr[x_] :=
Module[{a = StringReplace[ToStringRational[x], " " –> ""],
b = Join[Range5[33 ;; 35, 37 ;; 47], Range[58, 64], Range[91, 96],
Range[123, 126]]},
Sort[DeleteDuplicates[Select[StringSplit[a,
Map[FromCharacterCode[#] &, b]],
SymbolQ[#] && # != "" &]]]]
In[152]:= VarsInExpr["(a + b)/(c + 590*d$) + Sin[c]*Cos[d + h]"]
Out[152]= {"a", "b", "c", "Cos", "d", "d$", "h", "Sin"}
In[153]:= VarsInExpr[(a + b/x^2)/Sin[x*y] + 1/z^3 + Log[y]]
Out[153]= {"a", "b", "Csc", "Log", "x", "y", "z"}
In general, the procedures ExtrVarsOfStr ÷ ExtrVarsOfStr2
156
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
and VarsInExpr can be also rather useful for structural analysis
of algebraical expressions. Whereas the SymbToExpr procedure
applies symbols to specified sub–expressions located at certain
levels of an expression x. The procedure call SymbToExpr[x, d]
returns the result of applying of symbols to n–th sub–elements
located on m–th levels of an expression x. The 2nd argument d is
a simple or nested list of format {{n,s1,n2,…,np},…,{r,sj,r1,…,rt}},
where the 1st element n of sublist {n,s1,n1,…,np} defines level of
the expression x, the 2nd element s1 defines an applied symbol,
while its other elements {n1,…,np} define the positions numbers
of subexpressions at this level. Procedure handles the erroneous
situations conditioned by inadmissible levels, and positions of
elements at them, printing appropriate messages. The fragment
represents source code of the procedure and examples of its use.
In[6]:= SymbToExpr[x_, d_ /; ListQ[d]] := Module[{agn, t = 0, res = x,
h = If[NestListQ[d], d, {d}], k},
Do[If[Level[x, {j}] != {}, t++, Break[]], {j, Infinity}];
agn[y_, s_, n_, m_] := Module[{a},
If[n > t, Print["Level number more than maximal " <> ToString[t]],
If[Set[a, Cases[Level[y, {n}], Except[_Integer]]]; Length[a] < m,
Print["Level " <> ToString[n] <> " no contain an element with
number " <> ToString[m]],
res = Replace[y, a[[m]] –> h[[j]][[2]] @@ {a[[m]]}, n]]]];
Do[Do[agn[res, c, h[[j]][[1]], h[[j]][[k]]], {k, 3, Length[h[[j]]]}],
{j, Length[h]}]; res]
In[7]:= SymbToExpr[h + (x + y)/f[x, y^n]^g – m/n, {{4, s, 2, 3}, {2, h, 1, 2}}]
Out[7]= h – h[m]/n + (x + y)*h[f[x, s[y^n]]^–s[g]]
In[8]:= SymbToExpr[h + (x + y)/f[x, y^n]^g - m/n, {{4, S, 2, 3}, {2, V, 2, 8}}]
"Level 2 no contain an element with number 8"
Out[8]= h + (x + y)*f[x, S[y^n]]^–S[g] – m*V[1/n]
In[9]:= SymbToExpr[h + (x + y)/f[x, y^n]^g – m/n, {{6, s, 3}, {5, T, 1, 2}}]
"Level number more than maximal 5"
Out[9]= h – m/T[n] + f[x, T[y]^T[n]]^–g*(x + T[y])
In addition to the tools listed in this section, we have created a
large number of other useful tools for strings processing, that
can be found in [16]. The tools have proven their effectiveness
in many applications.
157
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
3.5. Mathematica tools for lists processing
At programming of many problems the use not of separate
expressions, but their sets made in the form lists is expedient.
At such approach we can instead of calculations of the separate
expressions to do the demanded operations as over lists in a
whole – unified objects – and over their separate elements. Lists
of various types represent important and one of the most often
used structures in the Mathematica system.
The list is one of the underlying data structures supported
by the Mathematica. The classic list structure has the following
format, namely: List:= {a, b, c, …, d}, where as elements of List
can be arbitrary expressions. When a list definition is calculated,
its elements are calculated from left to right, remaining at their
positions relative to the original list. Thus, in a list we have the
possibility to pass the result of evaluation of an element to the
following element of the list, accumulating an information in
the last list element. In particular, list structures of the form {a,
b, c, ..., Test}[[–1]] can act as test elements for formal arguments
of blocks, functions, and modules, for example:
In[3333]:= A[x_ /; {If[OddQ[x], Print["Odd number"],
Print["Even number"]], IntegerQ[x]}[[–1]]] := x^2
In[3334]:= A[77]
Odd number
Out[3334]= 5929
In the meantime, mention should also be made of the list
structure of form {a; b; c; d; ...; h} along with the list structures
with alternation of the delimiters {";", ","} of list elements which
are of quite important too. The difference between this lists and
the above list structure rather illustratively illustrates the next
simple example:
In[2229]:= {a = b, b = c, c = d}
Out[2229]= {b, c, d}
In[2230]:= {a = b; b = c; c = d}
Out[2230]= {d}
In[2231]:= {a = b, b = c; c = d}
Out[2231]= {b, d}
158
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
In[2234]:= B[x_ /; {h = x^3, If[OddQ[x], Print["Odd number"],
Print["Even number"]]; IntegerQ[x]}[[2]]] := x^2
In[2235]:= {B[78], h}
Even number
Out[2235]= {6084, 474552}
The above considerations are quite transparent and do not
require any clarifyings. Techniques represented in them are of
some practical interest in programming of the objects headings
and objects as a whole.
In the Mathematica many functions have Listable attribute
saying that an operator, block, function, module F with Listable
attribute are automatically applicable to each element of the list
used respectively as their operand or argument. The call of the
function ListableQ[x] returns True if a block, operator, function,
module x has Listable attribute, and False otherwise [4,10-16]. At
the formal level for a block, function and module F of arity 1 it
is possible to note the following defining relation, namely:
Map[F, {a, b, c, d, …}] ≡ {F[a], F[b], F[c], F[d], …}
where in the left part the block, function and module F can be
both with the Listable attribute, and without it whereas in the
right part the existence of Listable attribute for block, function
or module F is supposed. In addition, for blocks, functions and
modules without the Listable attribute for receiving such effect
the Map function is used. Meanwhile, for the nested lists, Map
does not produce the desired result, as an example illustrates:
In[1529]:= Map[F, {a, b, {c, d, {m, n}}, t}]
Out[1529]= {F[a], F[b], F[{c, d, {m, n}}], F[t]}
Moreover, attributing the Listable attribute to the Map, we not
only do not solve the problem, but violate this function. On the
other hand, a function extends the built–in function Scan onto
lists. The call ScanList[x, y] evaluates x applied through each
element of y (see the source code and examples below):
In[47]:= ScanList[x_, y_] := If[MemberQ[Attributes[x], Listable],
Map[x, y], SetAttributes[x, Listable]; {Map[x, y],
ClearAttributes[x, Listable]}[[1]]]
In[48]:= ScanList[f, {a, b, {c, d, {m, n}}, t, {g, s}}]
159
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
Out[48]= {f[a], f[b], {f[c], f[d], {f[m], f[n]}}, f[t], {f[g], f[s]}}
In[49]:= x[t_] := N[Sin[t], 3]; ScanList[x, {42, 47, {67, 87, {6, 7}}, 3}]
Out[49]= {–0.917, 0.124, {–0.856, –0.822, {–0.279, 0.657}}, 0.141}
The problem is solved only by attributing of Listable attribute to
F, as the previous example illustrates. Using of Listable attribute
allows to make processing of the nested lists, without breaking
their internal structure. The procedure call ListProcessing[w, y]
returns the list of the same internal structure as a list w whose
elements are processed by means of an y function. A fragment
below represents source code of the procedure with examples
of its application.
In[2225]:= ListProcessing[x_ /; ListQ[x], y_ /; SystemQ[y] ||
ProcQ[y] || FunctionQ[y] || PureFuncQ[y]] :=
Module[{f = y, g}, g = Attributes[f]; Unprotect[f];
Attributes[f] = {}; SetAttributes[f, Listable];
If[PureFuncQ[f], f = Map[f[#] &, x],
If[FreeQ[Attributes[y], Listable], SetAttributes[y, Listable];
f = y[x]; ClearAttributes[y, Listable], f = y[x]]]; f]
In[2226]:= x = {a, 7, d, c, {c, 5, s, {g, h, 8, p, d}, d}, 4, n};
ListProcessing[x, #^3 &]
Out[2226]= {a^3, 343, d^3, c^3, {c^3, 125, s^3,
{g^3, h^3, 512, p^3, d^3}, d^3}, 64, n^3}
In[2227]:= ListProcessing[x, ToString]
Out[2227]= {"a", "7", "d", "c", {"c", "5", "s", {"g", "h", "8", "p", "d"},
"d"}, "4", "n"}
In[2228]:= gv[x_] := If[SymbolQ[x], gs, If[PrimeQ[x], s, x]];
ListProcessing[x, gv]
Out[2228]= {gs, s, gs, {gs, s, gs, {gs, gs, 8, gs, gs}, gs}, 4, gs}
The procedure call ClusterSubLists[x] returns generally the
nested list, whose 3–element lists determine elements of a list x,
their positions and lengths of the sublists (clusters) that contain
more than 1 identical element and that begin with this element.
At the same time, the grouping of such sublists on base of their
first element is made. In a case of lack of clusters in the x list the
procedure call ClusterSubLists[x] returns the empty list, i.e. {}.
The following fragment represents source code of the procedure
ClusterSubLists with an example of its application.
160
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
In[3314]:= ClusterSubLists[x_ /; ListQ[x]] :=
Module[{a, b = {}, c, d, h = {}, g = {}, n = 1},
a = Gather[Map[{#, n++} &, x], #1[[1]] == #2[[1]] &];
a = Select[a, Length[#] > 1 &];
Do[AppendTo[b, Map[#[[2]] &, a[[j]]]], {j, 1, Length[a]}];
b = Map[Differences[#] &, b];
Do[Do[If[b[[j]][[k]] == 1,
g = Join[g, {a[[j]][[k]], a[[j]][[k + 1]]}], AppendTo[h, g]; g = {}],
{k, 1, Length[b[[j]]]}]; AppendTo[h, g]; g = {}, {j, 1, Length[b]}];
h = Map[If[# == {}, Nothing, DeleteDuplicates[#]] &,
DeleteDuplicates[h]];
ReduceLists[Map[ReduceLists, Gather[Map[Join[#[[1]],
{Length[#]}] &, h], #1[[1]] === #2[[1]] &]]]]
In[3315]:= ClusterSubLists[{a, a, a, c, c, c, c, a, a, a, b, b, b, a, a, a,
a, a, g, g, g, g, p, p, p, v, v, v, v, v, 77, 77, 77, 77, 77, 77, 77}]
Out[3315]= {{{a, 1, 3}, {a, 8, 3}, {a, 14, 5}}, {c, 4, 4}, {b, 11, 3}, {g, 19, 4},
{p, 23, 3}, {v, 26, 5}, {77, 31, 7}}
In difference of standard Partition function the procedure
PartitionCond, supplementing its, allows to partition the list
into sublists by its elements satisfying some testing function.
The procedure call PartitionCond[x, y] returns the nested list
consisting of sublists received by means of partition of a list x
by its elements satisfying a testing y function. At the same time,
these elements don't include in sublists. At absence in the x list
of the separative elements an initial x list is returned. At that, at
existing the third optional z argument – an arbitrary expression –
the call PartitionCond[x, y, z] returns the above nested list on
condition that the sequences of elements in its sublists will be
limited by the z element. In addition, if the call contains four
arguments and the fourth argument is 1 or 2 than the procedure
call PartitionCond[x, y, z, h = {1|2}] returns the above nested list
on condition that the elements sequences in its sublists will be
limited by the z element at the left (h = 1) or at the right (h = 2)
accordingly, otherwise the procedure call is equivalent the call
PartitionCond[x, y]. The fragment below represents the source
code of the PartitionCond procedure with typical examples of
its application [4-8,14-16].
161
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
In[2217]:= PartitionCond[x_ /; ListQ[x],
y_ /; Quiet[ProcFuncBlQ[y, Unique["g"]]], z___] :=
Module[{a, b, c, d},
If[Select[x, y] == {}, x, If[{z} != {} && Length[{z}] > 1,
If[{z}[[2]] == 1, c = {z}[[1]]; d = Nothing,
If[{z}[[2]] == 2, c = Nothing; d = {z}[[1]], c = d = Nothing]],
If[Length[{z}] == 1, c = d = {z}[[1]], c = d = Nothing]];
a = {1, Length[x]}; b = {};
Do[AppendTo[a, If[(y) @@ {x[[j]]}, j, Nothing]], {j, 1, Length[x]}];
a = Sort[DeleteDuplicates[a]];
Do[AppendTo[b, x[[a[[j]] ;; a[[j + 1]]]]], {j, 1, Length[a] – 1}];
b = ReplaceAll[Map[Map[If[(y) @@ {#}, Nothing, #] &, #1] &, b],
{} –> Nothing]];
Map[{a = #, Quiet[AppendTo[PrependTo[a, c], d]]}[[2]] &, b]]
In[2218]:= PartitionCond[{8, a, b, 3, 6, c, 7, d, h, 77, 72, d, s, 8, k,
f, a, 9}, IntegerQ[#] &]
Out[2218]= {{a, b}, {c}, {d, h}, {d, s}, {k, f, a}}
In[2219]:= PartitionCond[{8, a, b, 3, 6, c, 7, d, h, 77, 72, d, s, 8, k,
f, a, 9}, ! IntegerQ[#] &, gs]
Out[2219]= {{gs, 8, gs}, {gs, 3, 6, gs}, {gs, 7, gs}, {gs, 77, 72, gs},
{gs, 8, gs}, {gs, 9, gs}}
The Mathematica at manipulation with the list structures
has certain shortcomings among which impossibility of direct
assignment to elements of a list of expressions is, for example:
In[36]:= {a, b, c, d, h, g, s, x, y, z}[[10]] = 590
…Set: {a,b,c,d,h,g,s,x,y,z} in the part assignment is not a symbol.
Out[36]= 590
In order to simplify the implementation of procedures that
use similar direct assignments to the list elements, the following
ListAssignP procedure is used, whose call ListAssignP[x, n, y]
returns the updated value of a list x which is based on results of
assignment of a value y or the list of values to n elements of the
x list where n – one position or their list. Moreover, if the lists n
and y have different lengths, their common minimum value is
chosen. The ListAssignP procedure expands the functionality
of the Mathematica, doing quite correct assignments to the list
elements what the system fully doesn't provide. The ListAssign1
162
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
procedure is a certain modification of the ListAssignP procedure
its call is equivalent to the ListAssignP call. The source code of
the ListAssignP procedure along with some examples of its use
are represented below.
In[2138]:= ListAssignP[x_ /; ListQ[x], n_ /; PosIntQ[n] ||
PosIntListQ[n], y_] :=
Module[{a = DeleteDuplicates[Flatten[{n}]], b = Flatten[{y}], c, k = 1},
If[a[[–1]] > Length[x], Return[Defer[ListAssignP[x, n, y]]],
c = Min[Length[a], Length[b]]];
While[k <= c, Quiet[Check[ToExpression[ToString[x[[a[[k]]]]] <>
" = " <> ToString1[If[ListQ[n], b[[k]], y]]], Null]]; k++];
If[NestListQ1[x], x[[–1]], x]]
In[2139]:= ListAssignP[{x, y, z}, {1, 2, 3}, {42, 78, 2020}]
Out[2139]= {42, 78, 2020}
In[2140]:= Clear[x, y, z]; ListAssignP[{x, y, z}, 2, 590]
Out[2140]= {x, 590, z}
The following procedure carries out exchange of elements
of a list that are determined by the pairs of positions. The call
SwapInList[x,y] returns the exchange of elements of a list x that
are determined by pairs of positions or their list y. At the same
time, if the x list is explicitly encoded at the procedure call, the
updated list is returned, if the x is determined by a symbol (that
determines a list) in the string format then along with returning
of the updated list also value of the x symbol is updated in situ.
The procedure processes the erroneous situation caused by the
indication of non–existent positions in the x list with returning
$Failed and the appropriate message. Note, it is recommended
to consider a reception used for updating of the list in situ. The
procedure is of a certain interest at the operating with lists. The
fragment represents source code of the SwapInList procedure
and examples of its use which rather visually illustrate the told.
In[716]:= SwapInList[x_ /; ListQ[x] || StringQ[x] &&
ListQ[ToExpression[x]], y_ /; SimpleListQ[y]||ListListQ[y] &&
Length[y[[1]]] == 2] := Module[{a, b, c = ToExpression[x], d,
h = If[SimpleListQ[y], {y}, y]},
d = Complement[DeleteDuplicates[Flatten[y]], Range[1, Length[c]]];
If[d != {}, Print["Positions " <> ToString[d] <> " are absent in list " <>
163
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
ToString[c]]; $Failed, Do[a = c[[h[[j]][[1]]]]; b = c[[h[[j]][[2]]]];
c = ReplacePart[c, h[[j]][[1]] –> b];
c = ReplacePart[c, h[[j]][[2]] –> a], {j, 1, Length[h]}];
If[StringQ[x], ToExpression[x <> "=" <> ToString[c]], c]]]
In[717]:= SwapInList[{1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9}, {{1, 3}, {4, 6}, {8, 10}}]
Positions {10} are absent in list {1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9}
Out[717]= $Failed
In[718]:= SwapInList[{1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9}, {{1, 3}, {4, 6}}]
Out[718]= {3, 2, 1, 6, 5, 4, 7, 8, 9}
In the Mathematica for grouping of expressions along with
simple lists also more complex list structures in the form of the
nested lists are used, whose elements are lists (sublists) too. In
this regard the lists of the ListList type whose elements – sublists
of identical length are of special interest. The Mathematica for
simple lists has testing function whose call ListQ[j] returns True,
if j – a list, and False otherwise. While for testing of the nested
lists we defined the useful enough functions NestListQ, NestQL,
NestListQ1, ListListQ [16]. These tools are quite often used as a
part of the testing components of the headings of procedures
and functions both from our MathToolBox package, and in the
different blocks, functions and modules first of all that are used
in different problems of the system character [4-15].
In addition to the above testing functions some functions of
the same class that are useful enough in programming of tools
to processing of the list structures of an arbitrary organization
have been created [16]. Among them can be noted testing tools
such as BinaryListQ, IntegerListQ, ListNumericQ, ListSymbolQ,
PosIntListQ, ListExprHeadQ, PosIntListQ, PosIntQ. In particular,
the call ListExprHeadQ[x,h] returns True if a list x contains only
elements meeting the condition Head[a] = h, and False otherwise.
At that, the testing means process all elements of the analyzed
list, including all its sublists of any level of nesting. The above
means are often used at programming of the problems oriented
on the lists processing. These and other means of the given type
are located in our MathToolBox package [16]. Their correct use
assumes that the package is uploaded into the current session.
164
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
A number of problems dealing with the nested lists require
to determine their maximum nesting level. In this direction, we
have proposed a number of means. For example, the procedure
call ListLevelMax[x] whose source code along with examples of
its application are shown below, returns the maximum nesting
level of a list x. Whereas the procedure call ListLevelMax[x, y]
with the 2nd optional argument y – an arbitrary symbol – through
y additionally returns the nested list whose 2-elements sub-lists
as the first argument define numbers of nesting levels of the x
list, while as the 2nd elements define the quantities of elements
that are different from lists at corresponding levels.
In[1222]:= ListLevelMax[x_ /; ListQ[x], y___] :=
Module[{a = x, b = {}, t = 1},
Do[AppendTo[b, {t, Length[Select[a, ! ListQ[#] &]]}];
a = Select[a, ListQ[#] &]; If[a == {}, Break[], t++];
a = Flatten[a, 1], {j, Infinity}];
If[{y} != {} && SymbolQ[y], y = b, 77]; t]
In[1223]:= ListLevelMax[{a, b, {c, {m, {c, {{b}}, d}, n}, d}, c, d}]
Out[1223]= 6
In[1224]:= ListLevelMax[{a, b, {c, {m, {c, {{b}}, d}, n}, d}, c, d}, gs]
Out[1224]= 6
In[1225]:= gs
Out[1225]= {{1, 4}, {2, 2}, {3, 2}, {4, 2}, {5, 0}, {6, 1}}
In[1226]:= ListLevelMax[{a, b, c, m, n, d, c, d}, gv]
Out[1226]= 1
In[1227]:= gv
Out[1227]= {{1, 8}}
The procedure call MaxLevel[x] returns the maximal level
of nesting of a list x; its source code is represented below:
In[1230]:= MaxLevel[x_ /; ListQ[x]] := Module[{k},
If[! NestListQ1[x], 1, For[k = 1, k <= Infinity, k++,
If[Level[x, {k}] == {}, Break[], Continue[]]]; k]]
In[1231]:= MaxLevel[{a, b, {c, {m, {c, {{b}}, d}, n}, d}, c, d}]
Out[1231]= 7
In[1231]:= MaxLevel[{a, b, {c, {m, {c, {{}}, d}, n}, d}, c, d}]
Out[1231]= 6
In[1232]:= MaxLevelList[x_ /; ListQ[x]] :=
165
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
Module[{b = 0, a = ReplaceAll[x, {} –> {77}]},
Do[If[Level[a, {j}] == {}, Return[b], b++], {j, 1, Infinity}]]
In[1233]:= MaxLevelList[{a, b, {c, {m, {c, {{}}, d}, n}, d}, c, d}]
Out[1233]= 6
In[1234]:= MaxLevelList[{a, b, {c, {m, {c, {{b}}, d}, n}, d}, c, d}]
Out[1234]= 6
Meanwhile, it is appropriate to make a significant comment
here about our means that use the built–in Level function, and
without its using. The function call Level[expr, level] returns a
list of all subexpressions of expr on levels specified by level. At
the same time the function call Level[expr, {level}] returns a list
of all subexpressions of expr on a level. Meanwhile, using the
built–in Level function when the nested lists are used as an expr
requires a certain care. For example, from the fragment below
easily follows, you can obtain the incorrect results at using of
the Level function when calculating the maximum nesting level
of a list. In particular, on lists of form {…{}…} and {…{a, b, c}…}.
In[3342]:= Do [Print[Level[{{{{a, b, c}}}}, {j}]], {j, 1, 5}]
{{{{a, b, c}}}}
{{{a, b, c}}}
{{a, b, c}}
{a, b, c}
{}
In[3343]:= MaxLevel[{{{{a, b, c}}}}]
Out[3343]= 4
In[3344]:= Do [Print[Level[{{{{}}}}, {j}]], {j, 1, 5}]
{{{{}}}}
{{{}}}
{{}}
{}
{}
In[3345]:= MaxLevel[{{{{}}}}]
Out[3345]= 3
In[3346]:= ListLevelMax[{{{{a, b, c}}}}]
Out[3346]= 4
In[3347]:= ListLevelMax[{{{{}}}}]
Out[3347]= 4
166
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
In[3348]:= MaxLevel1[{{{{a, b, c}}}}]
Out[3348]= 4
In[3349]:= MaxLevel1[{{{{}}}}]
Out[3349]= 4
In[3350]:= Map[#[{{}}] &, {MaxLevel, ListLevelMax}]
Out[3350]= {1, 2}
It has been found that it is the use of an empty list {} as the
last nesting level in the list that results in, among other things,
an incorrect calculation of the maximum nesting level of a list.
Therefore, in the development of the built–in Level function for
lists, a simple Mlist function has been programmed, whose call
Mlist[x] returns the replacement result in a list x of sub–lists of
view {}, i.e. empty lists, to lists of view {w}, where w is a symbol
unique to the current session. The following fragment presents
the source code of the function with an example of its use along
witx its use in the MaxLevel2 procedure being a modification of
the above MaxLevel procedure, eliminating said its drawback.
In[1240]:= Mlist[x_] := If[ListQ[x],
ReplaceAll[x, {} –> ToString[{Unique["v77" ]}]], x]
In[1241]:= Mlist[{{}, {{{}}}, {}}]
Out[1241]= {"{v7711}", {{"{v7711}"}}, "{v7711}"}
In[1242]:= MaxLevel2[x_ /; ListQ[x]] := Module[{a = Mlist[x], k},
If[! NestListQ1[a], 1, For[k = 1, k <= Infinity, k++,
If[Level[a, {k}] == {}, Break[], Continue[]]]]; k – 1]
In[1243]:= MaxLevel2[{a, b, {c, {m, {c, {{b}}, d}, n}, d}, c, d}]
Out[1243]= 6
In[1244]:= MaxLevel2[{a, b, {c, {m, {c, {{}}, d}, n}, d}, c, d}]
Out[1244]= 6
Meanwhile, it should be borne in mind that the use of the
Mlist function has its limitations – its application may be quite
appropriate in a case of tasks whose algorithm remains correct
if the structural organization of a list is preserved, but without
taking into account its content. This is a case when calculating
the maximum nesting level of a list.
Note that in addition to the above means, several versions
of similar means have been created: MaxLevel1, MaxLevelList,
MaxNestLevel using other approaches [16].
167
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
Finally, based on the pure structure of the list, it is possible
successfully solve a number of nested list processing problems,
including calculating their maximum nesting level. At the same
time, the pure structure of a list will be understood as a list, all
elements of which are deleted, forming the corresponding list
consisting only of characters {"{", "}"}. The following procedure
solves the converting problem of a list to its pure structure. The
sourse code of the PureListStr function is represented below.
In[2242]:= PureListStr[x_ /; ListQ[x]] := Module[{f,
a = Map[ToString[#] &, Flatten[x]]}, f[t_] := Quiet[Set[t, Nothing]];
SetAttributes[f, Listable]; {Map[f[#] &, x], Map[ClearAll[#] &, a]}[[1]]]
In[2243]:= PureListStr[{a, b, c, d}]
Out[2243]= {}
In[2244]:= PureListStr[{{a, {a, b, c, {{{a, {}, b}}}}, b, {c, d}}}]
Out[2244]= {{{{{{{}}}}}, {}}}
In[2245]:= PureListStr[{{a, {a, {c, {h}}, b, c, {{{a, {n}, b}}}}, b, {c, d}}}]
Out[2245]= {{{{{}}, {{{{}}}}}, {}}}
The function call PureListStr[x] returns the result of converting
of a list x to its pure structure. So, the previous fragment additionally
represents the examples of the above function application.
This function is a rather useful for lists processing problems. In
particular, it makes it possible to calculate the maximum nesting level
of a list based not on the built-in Level function, but on pure structure,
as illustrated by example of the MaxLevel3 procedure, whose source
code along with examples of its use is represented below.
In[2249]:= MaxLevel3[x_ /; ListQ[x]] :=
Module[{a = PureListStr[x], p = 1},
Do[If[a == {}, Return[p], a = ReplaceAll[a, {} –> Nothing]; p++],
{j, Infinity}]]
In[2250]:= Map[MaxLevel3, {{}, {{{b}}}}]
Out[2250]= {1, 3}
In[2251]:= MaxLevel3[{a, b, {c, {m, {c, {{{{{}}}}}, d}, n}, d}, c, d}]
Out[2251]= 9
In[2252]:= MaxLevel3[{{a, {a, b, c, {{{a, {{b, c}}, b}}}}, b, {c, d}}}]
Out[2252]= 8
The procedure call MaxLevel3[x] returns the maximal nesting
level of a list x; examples presented above illustrate aforesaid.
168
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
Along with the task of determining the maximum nesting
level of a list, the PureListStr procedure allows to calculate socalled isolated levels of the list, where as the isolated nesting
levels are undestood the nesting levels in a list of isolated its
sub-lists. The procedure call IsolLevelsList[x] returns the list of the
isolated nesting levels of a list x, while the call IsolLevelsList[x, y]
through optional argument y – an arbitrary symbol – additionally
returns the maximal nesting level of the x list. Fragment below
represents the source code of the IsolLevelsList procedure along
with typical examples of its application.
In[2277]:= IsolLevelsList[x_ /; ListQ[x]] :=
Module[{a = PureListStr[x], b, c, d = {}, h = "", k},
b = StringTake[ToString[a], {2, –2}]; c = StringSplit[b, ","];
c = Map[StringTrim[#] &, c];
Do[h = h <> c[[j]];
If[SyntaxQ[h], AppendTo[d, MaxLevel3[ToExpression[h]]]; h = "",
Do[h = h <> c[[k]],
If[SyntaxQ[h], AppendTo[d, MaxLevel3[ToExpression[h]]]; h = "",
Break[]]], {k, j, Length[c]}], {j, Length[c]}];
If[{y} != {} && SymbolQ[y], y = Max[Map[# + 1 &, d]], 7];
Map[# + 1 &, d]]
In[2278]:= d = {{{}}, {}, {{{{}, {}}}}, {{{{{}, {}}}}}};
In[2279]:= IsolLevelsList[d]
Out[2279]= {3, 2, 5, 6}
In[2280]:= d1 = {{}, {{}}, {{{}, {}, {}}}, {{{{}, {}}}}};
In[2281]:= {IsolLevelsList[d1, gs], gs}
Out[2281]= {{2, 3, 4, 5}, 5}
In[2282]:= MaxLevel3[d1]
Out[2282]= 5
In[2283]:= {IsolLevelsList[{{{{{{{}}}}}}}, gs1], gs1}
Out[2283]= {{7}, 7}
In[2284]:= {IsolLevelsList[{{}, {c, {c, {{b, {m, {n}, d}, n, d}}, d}}}, j], j}
Out[2284]= {{2, 7}, 7}
In addition to the above-mentioned problems based on use
of pure list structures, there are many other problems utilizing
this methodology. A number of quite interesting tasks that use
such an approach can be found, for example, in [6,8-15].
169
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
The procedure below gives an useful method of elements
transposition of the list. The procedure call ListRestruct[x, y]
returns the result of mutual exchanges of elements of a list x that
are defined by the rule or their list y of the kind aj –> bj, where
aj – positions of elements of the list x and bj – their positions in
the returned list, and vice versa. At that, the procedure excludes
unacceptable rules from y list. The fragment represents source
code of the ListRestruct procedure and examples of its use.
In[21]:= ListRestruct[x_List, y_ /; RuleQ[y]||ListRulesQ[y]] :=
Module[{b = If[RuleQ[y], {y}, y], c, d},
b = DeleteDuplicates[DeleteDuplicates[b, #1[[1]] === #2[[1]] &],
#1[[1]] === #2[[1]] &];
c = Map[#[[1]] –> x[[#[[2]]]] &, b]; d = ReplacePart[x, c];
c = Map[#[[1]] –> x[[#[[2]]]] &, RevRules[b]]; ReplacePart[d, c]]
In[22]:= ListRestruct[{1, 3, 77, 4, 5, 28, 3, 2, 6, 40, 4, 3, 20, 3},
{1 –> 6, 8 –> 12, 1 –> 14, 8 –> 10, 5 –> 10}]
Out[22]= {28, 3, 77, 4, 40, 1, 3, 3, 6, 5, 4, 2, 20, 3}
In[23]:= ListRestruct[{b, {j, n}, c + f[t], d/(h + d)}, {4 –> 1, 3 –> 2}]
Out[23]= {d/(d + h), c + f[t], {j, n}, b}
Means of operating with levels of the nested list are of a
special interest. In this context the following tools can be rather
useful. As one of such means the MaxLevel procedure can be
presented whose call MaxLevel[x] returns the maximum nesting
level of a list x (at that, the nesting level of a simple x list is supposed
equal to one). In addition, MaxLevel1 procedure is an equivalent
version of the previous procedure. Whereas the call ListLevels[x]
returns the list of nesting levels of a list x; for the simple list x or
empty list the procedure call returns {1}. The following fragment
represents source codes of the above three procedures including
typical examples of their applications.
In[1333]:= L = {a, b, a, {d, c, s}, a, b, {b, c, {x, y, {v, g, z,
{90, {500, {}, 77}}, a, k, a}}, b}, c, b};
In[1334]:= MaxLevel[L_ /; ListQ[L]] := Module[{k},
For[k = 1, k <= Infinity, k++, If[Level[L, {k}] == {},
Break[], Continue[]]]; k]
In[1335]:= MaxLevel1[x_ /; ListQ[x]] := Module[{a = x, k = 1},
170
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
While[NestListQ1[a], k++; a = Flatten[a, 1]; Continue[]]; k]
In[1336]:= Map[#[L] &, {MaxLevel, MaxLevel1}]
Out[1336]= {7, 7}
In[52]:= ListLevels[x_ /; ListQ[x]] := Module[{a = x, b, c = {}, k = 1},
If[! NestListQ1[x], {1}, While[NestListQ1[a], b = Flatten[a, 1];
If[Length[b] >= Length[a], AppendTo[c, k++],
AppendTo[c, k++]]; a = b; Continue[]]; c = AppendTo[c, k++]]]
In[53]:= Map[ListLevels[#] &, {L, {{{{}}}}, {}}]
Out[53]= {{1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7}, {1, 2, 3, 4}, {1}}
Between the above procedures the defining relations take place:
Flatten[x] ≡ Flatten[x, MaxLevel[x]]; MaxLevel[x] ≡ ListLevels[x][[-1]]
The AllElemsMaxLevels procedure extends the procedure
ElemsMaxLevels onto all expressions composing the analyzed
list [8,16]. The call AllElemsMaxLevels[x] returns the list of the
ListList type whose 2–element sublists have all possible elements
of a list x as the first elements, and their maximal nesting levels
in the x list as the second elements.
In[67]:= AllElemsMaxLevels[x_ /; ListQ[x]] :=
Module[{g = ToString1[x], c, Agn},
If[x == {}, {}, Agn[z_ /; ListQ[x], y_] :=
Module[{a = MaxLevelList[z], d = {}, h},
h = Map[{#, Level[z, {#}]} &, Range[1, a]];
Do[Do[AppendTo[d, If[FreeQ[h[[j]][[2]], y[[k]]], Nothing,
{y[[k]], j}]], {k, 1, Length[y]}], {j, 1, a}];
d = Gather[d, #1[[1]] == #2[[1]] &];
d = Map[Sort[#, #1[[2]] >= #2[[2]] &] &, d]; Map[#[[1]] &, d]];
c = AllSubStrings[g, 0, ExprQ[#] &];
g = DeleteDuplicates[ToExpression[c]]; g = Agn[x, g];
If[Length[g] == 1, g[[1]], g]]]
In[68]:= L := {a, b, {{a, b}, {{m, n, {p, {{{f[t]}}}}}}}, c, {}, m, n, p,
{{{{a + b}, g}}}}; AllElemsMaxLevels[L]
Out[69]= {{a, 6}, {b, 6}, {m, 4}, {n, 4}, {p, 5}, {f, 8}, {t, 9}, {c, 1}, {g, 4},
{{}, 1}, {f[t], 8}, {a + b, 5}, {{a, b}, 2}, {{f[t]}, 8}, {{a + b}, 4}, {{{f[t]}}, 7},
{{{{f[t]}}}, 5}, {{{a + b}, g}, 3}, {{{{a + b}, g}}, 2}, {{p, {{{f[t]}}}}, 4},
{{{{{a + b}, g}}}, 1}, {{m, n, {p, {{{f[t]}}}}}, 3}, {{{m, n, {p, {{{f[t]}}}}}}, 2},
{{{a, b}, {{m, n, {p, {{{f[t]}}}}}}}, 1}, {{a, b, {{a, b}, {{m, n, {p, {{{f[t]}}}}}}},
c, {}, m, n, p, {{{{a + b}, g}}}}, 1}}
171
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
The procedure call ElemsOnLevelList[x] returns the nested
list whose elements – the nested two–element lists, whose the
first elements are nesting levels of a list x, whereas the second
elements – the lists of elements at these nesting levels. If list x is
empty, then the list {} is returned. Below, the source code of the
procedure with an example of its application are represented.
In[2370]:= ElemsOnLevelList[x_ /; ListQ[x]] :=
Module[{a, b, c = {}, d = {}, k = 1, t, f, h, g},
f = ReplaceAll[x, {{} –> Set[g, FromCharacterCode[3]], 2 –> h}];
a = LevelsOfList[f];
Do[AppendTo[c, {a[[t = k++]], Flatten[f][[t]]}], {Length[a]}];
c = Map[Flatten, Gather[c, #1[[1]] == #2[[1]] &]]; k = 1;
Do[AppendTo[d, {c[[t = k++]][[1]], Select[c[[t]],
EvenQ[Flatten[Position[c[[t]], #]][[1]]] &]}], {Length[c]}];
c = ReplaceAll[d, {Null –> Nothing, h –> 2}];
ReplaceAll[Sort[c, #1[[1]] < #2[[1]] &], g –> Nothing]]
In[2371]:= ElemsOnLevelList[L]
Out[2371]= {{1, {a, b, c, m, n, p}}, {3, {a, b}}, {4, {m, n, g}},
{5, {p, a + b}}, {8, {f[t]}}}
The following procedure represents a rather useful version
of the above procedure. The procedure call ElemsOnLevel1[x, y]
returns the result of distribution of elements on nesting levels
of a list x. In addition, at a nesting level n of form ...{a, b, ..., {c},
..., d}... only {a, b, ..., d} elements other than lists are considered
as elements, whereas the elements of more higher nesting level
p > n, such as {c}, are ignored. The source code of the procedure
ElemsOnLevel1 and examples of its use are represented below.
In[2221]:= ElemsOnLevel1[x_ /; ListQ[x], y___] :=
Module[{a = ElemsOnLevel[x], b, c = {}, d = {}},
b[t_] := AppendTo[c, t]; SetAttributes[b, Listable]; Map[b, a];
c = Gather[Partition[c, 3], #1[[3]] == #2[[3]] &];
c = Map[Flatten, c];
Do[AppendTo[d, {c[[j]][[3]], Map[c[[j]][[#]] &,
Range[1, Length[c[[j]]], 3]]}], {j, Length[c]}];
c = Sort[d, #1[[1]] < #2[[1]] &];
If[{y} != {} && ! HowAct[y],
y = Map[{#[[1]], Length[#[[2]]]} &, c], 77]; c]
172
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
In[2222]:= t := {{p, b, x^2 + z^2, c^b, 7.7, 78, m/n}, u, c^2,
{{{n, {"h", f, {m, n, p}, c}, np^2}}}, {77, "x"}}
In[2223]:= ElemsOnLevel1[t]
Out[2223]= {{1, {u, c^2}}, {2, {p, b, x^2 + z^2, c^b, 7.7, 78, m/n,
77, "x"}}, {4, {n, np^2}}, {5, {"h", f, c}}, {6, {m, n, p}}}
In[2224]:= ElemsOnLevel1[t, agn]
Out[2224]= {{1, {u, c^2}}, {2, {p, b, x^2 + z^2, c^b, 7.7, 78, m/n,
77, "x"}}, {4, {n, np^2}}, {5, {"h", f, c}}, {6, {m, n, p}}}
In[2225]:= agn
Out[2225]= {{1, 2}, {2, 9}, {4, 2}, {5, 3}, {6, 3}}
The procedure call returns the result as the nested list of the
form {{la, {a1,…,an}}, {lb, {b1,...,bm}},…,{lc, {c1,...,cp}}} that defines
the distribution of elements {q1,...,qt} on a nesting level lq, while
thru the optional argument y – an indefinite variable – is returned
the nested list of the ListList type of the form {{la, na}, {lb, ba},…,
{lc, ca}}, where lj – a nesting level and nj – number of elements
on this level. The ElemsOnLevel1 procedure is of certain interest
as in determining the structural organization of nested lists and
at programming of a number tasks connected with nested lists.
Using the ElemsOnLevelList procedure, we can determine a
tool of converting of any list into so-called canonical form, i.e. in
the list of form {Level1, {Level2, {Level3, {Level4,…,Leveln}…}}}};
at the same time, all elements of a Levelj level are sorted {j=1..n}.
The problem is solved by a tool, whose call RestructLevelsList[x]
returns a list x in the above canonical form. The fragment below
represents source code of the tool and an example of its use.
In[376]:= RestructLevelsList[x_ /; ListQ[x]] :=
Module[{a, b = FromCharacterCode[3], g = FromCharacterCode[4],
c, d, h = {}}, d = b; a = ElemsOnLevelList[ReplaceAll[x, {} –> {g}]];
c = Map[{AppendTo[h, #[[1]]]; #[[1]], Join[Sort[#[[2]]], {b}]} &, a];
h = Flatten[{1, Differences[h]}];
Do[d = ReplaceAll[d, b –> If[c[[j]][[1]] – j == 1, c[[j]][[2]],
Nest[List, c[[j]][[2]], h[[j]] – 1]]], {j, 1, Length[h]}];
ReplaceAll[d, {b –> Nothing, g –> {}}]]
In[377]:= RestructLevelsList[L]
Out[377]= {a, b, c, m, n, p, {{}, {a, b, {g, m, n, {a + b, p, {{{f[t]}}}}}}}}
173
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
The following procedure has algorithm different from the
previous procedure and defines a tool of converting of any list
into the above canonical form; all elements of a Levelj level are
sorted {j = 1..n}. The procedure call CanonListForm[x] returns a
list x in the above canonical form. The fragment presents source
code of the procedure and typical examples of its application.
In[7]:= CanonListForm[x_ /; ListQ[x]] :=
Module[{a = Map[{#[[1]], Sort[#[[2]]]} &, ElemsOnLevelList[x]],
b, c, h = {}, p, m, s, f, n = 2, d = FromCharacterCode[3]},
b = Max[Map[#[[1]] &, a]]; AppendTo[h, c = "{" <> d <> "1,"];
Do[Set[c, "{" <> d <> ToString[n++] <> ","];
AppendTo[h, c], {j, 2, b}];
p = StringJoin[h] <> StringMultiple["}", b];
m = Map[Rule[d <> ToString[#[[1]]],
StringTake[ToString1[#[[2]]], {2, –2}]] &, a];
m = Map[If[#[[2]] == "", Rule[#[[1]], "{}"], #] &, m];
s = StringReplace[p, m];
f[t_] := If[! StringFreeQ[ToString[t], d], Nothing, t];
SetAttributes[f, Listable];
Map[f, ToExpression[StringReplace[s, ",}" –> "}"]]]]
In[8]:= L = {s, "a", g, {{{{{m}}}}}, m, {{{77}}}, m, c, m, {f, d, {{72, s}},
h, m, {m + p, {{p}}, n, 52, p, a}}, {7, {90, 500}}}; CanonListForm[L]
Out[8]= {"a", c, g, m, m, m, s, {7, d, f, h, m, {52, 90, 500, a, n, p,
m + p, {72, 77, s, {p, {m}}}}}}
The CanonListForm uses a number of receptions useful in
practical programming of the problems dealt of lists of various
type. Whereas the following simple function allows to obtain a
representation of a list x in a slightly different canonical format:
{{L1}, {{L2}}, {{{L3}}},…,{{{…{Ln}…}}}} where Lj present the sorted
list elements at appropriate nesting j level of the x list (j = 1..n):
In[4331]:= CanonListForm1[x_ /; ListQ[x]] :=
Map[Nest[List, #[[2]], #[[1]] – 1] &, Map[{#[[1]], Sort[#[[2]]]} &,
ElemsOnLevelList[x]]]
In[4332]:= CanonListForm1[L = {a, b, {c, d, {g, h, {x, {y, {z}}}}}}]
Out[4332]= {{a, b}, {{c, d}}, {{{g, h}}}, {{{{x}}}}, {{{{{y}}}}}, {{{{{{z}}}}}}}
In[4333]:= Map[LevelsList[#] &, CanonListForm1[L]]
Out[4333]= {1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6}
174
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
At the same time, the nesting of elements of a list returned
by the CanonListForm1 function can be defined, for example,
by LevelsList procedure calls as illustrates the last example of
the previous fragment. Incidentally, the list of elements on each
level of the nested list, which in turn are different from the lists,
is of a certain interest. This problem is solved by means of the
procedure whose call ElemsOnLevels4[x] returns the list of 2–
element sub–lists in ascending order of the nesting levels of a
list x; the first element of each sublist defines the list of elements
(which are different from the list) of the j–th nesting level, whereas
the second element defines the j–level.
In[7]:= ElemsOnLevels4[x_ /; ListQ[x]] := Module[{a = {}, b = 77},
Do[b = Level[x, {j}]; If[b != {}, AppendTo[a, {Map[If[ListQ[#],
Nothing, #] &, b], j}], Return[a]], {j, 1, Infinity}]]
In[8]:= ElemsOnLevels4[{a, b, {c, d, {g, h, {x, {y, {z, g}}}}}}]
Out[8]= {{{a, b}, 1}, {{c, d}, 2}, {{g, h}, 3}, {{x}, 4}, {{y}, 5}, {{z, g}, 6}}
On the basis of the above procedure the NumElemsOnLevels
function useful enough in a number of appendices can be quite
easily programmed. The call NumElemsOnLevels[x] returns the
list of ListList type, whose two–element sublists define nesting
levels and quantity of elements on them respectively. While the
function call NumElemsOnLevel[x, p] returns the quantity of
elements of a list x on its nesting level p. In a case of absence of
the p level the function call returns $Failed with printing of the
appropriate message. The source codes of both functions with
examples of their application are represented in [8-16]. Whereas
the problem of by-level sorting of elements of the nested list is
solved by the procedure whose call SortOnLevels1[x, y] returns
the default sort result of each nesting level of a list x, if optional
y argument is missing, or according to a set ordering function y.
In[7]:= SortOnLevels1[x_ /; ListQ[x], y___] := Module[{a, b = x, c},
a = MaxLevel[x]; Do[c = Level[b, {j}];
b = ReplaceAll[b, c –> Sort[c, If[{y} != {}, y, Nothing]]], {j, a, 1, –1}]; b]
In[8]:= g = {3, 2, 1, {5, 77, 6, 8, {72, 8, 9, {0, 5, 6, 1}}, 78, 12, 67, 78}};
In[9]:= SortOnLevels1[g, #1 <= #2 &]
Out[9]= {1, 2, 3, {5, 6, 8, 77, {8, 9, 72, {0, 1, 5, 6}}, 12, 67, 78, 78}}
175
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
The procedure call LevelsOfList[x] returns the list of levels
of elements of a list Flatten[x] of a source x list. In addition, in a
case of the empty x list, {} is returned; in a case of a simple x list
the single list of length Length[Flatten[x]], i.e. {1, 1,...,1, 1} will be
returned, i.e. level of all elements of a simple list is equal 1. On
lists of the kind {{...{{}}...}} the procedure call returns the empty
list, i.e. {}. The following fragment represents source code of the
procedure with a typical example of its application.
In[10]:= LevelsOfList[x_ /; ListQ[x]] := Module[{L, L1, t, p, k, h,
g, j, s, w = ReplaceAll[x, {} –> {FromCharacterCode[2]}]},
{j, s} = ReduceLevelsList[w]; j = Prepend[j, 1];
Delete[If[j == {}, {}, If[! NestListQ1[j], Map[#^0 &, Range[1, Length[j]]],
If[FullNestListQ[j], Map[#^0 &, Range[1, Length[Flatten[j]]]], {p, h,
L, L1, g} = {1, FromCharacterCode[1], j, {}, {}}; ClearAll[t];
Do[For[k = 1, k <= Length[L], k++,
If[! ListQ[L[[k]]] && ! SuffPref[ToString[L[[k]]], h, 1],
AppendTo[g, 0]; AppendTo[L1, h <> ToString[p]],
If[! ListQ[L[[k]]] && ! SuffPref[ToString[L[[k]]], h, 1],
AppendTo[g, 0]; AppendTo[L1, L[[k]]], AppendTo[g, 1];
AppendTo[L1, L[[k]]]]]];
If[! MemberQ[g, 1], L1, L = Flatten[L1, 1]; L1 = {}; g = {}; p++],
{Levels[j, t]; t}];
ToExpression[Map[StringDrop[#, 1] &, L]]]]] + s – 1, 1]]
In[11]:= L = {a, m, n, {{b}, {c}, {{m, {{{gv}}}, n, {{{{{gs}}}}}}}}, d};
In[12]:= LevelsOfList[L]
Out[12]= {1, 1, 1, 3, 3, 4, 7, 4, 9, 1}
In[13]:= LevelsOfList[Flatten[L]]
Out[13]= {1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1}
In[14]:= ElemsAtLevels[x_ /; ListQ[x]] :=
Module[{a = Flatten[x], b}, b = LevelsOfList[x];
Map[{a[[#]], b[[#]]} &, Range[1, Length[a]]]]
In[15]:= ElemsAtLevels[L]
Out[15]= {{a, 1}, {m, 1}, {n, 1}, {b, 3}, {c, 3}, {m, 4}, {gv, 7}, {n, 4},
{gs, 9}, {d, 1}}
Using the previous procedure, it is easy to program simple
procedure whose call ElemsAtLevels[x] returns the list of ListList
type, whose two–element sub–lists determine the elements of a
Flatten[x] list and the nesting levels at which they are in x.
176
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
To illustrate a number of techniques that are rather useful
in solving problems related to the nested lists, you can refer to
the RestNestList procedure algorithm, which is as follows: the
calling RestNestList[x, y] procedure returns the original nested
list x, while through second argument y – an indefinite variable –
the Flatten[x] list is returned. The procedure forms a distribution
vector of brackets ("{", "}") in the x list in the form of a W list of
the ListList type on the basis of which the initial list x is restored
from the Flatten[x] list. The source code of the above procedure
illustrates this quite clearly.
In[325]:= RestNestList[x_ /; NestListQ1[x], y_ /; SymbolQ[y]] :=
Module[{a = ToString1[x], b, W = {}, d}, b = StringLength[a];
Do[d = StringTake[a, {j}]; If[d == "{", AppendTo[W, {1, j}],
If[d == "}", AppendTo[W, {2, j}], AppendTo[W, Nothing]]], {j, b}];
d = ToString1[Flatten[x]]; y = ToExpression[d];
Do[d = StringInsert[d, If[W[[j]][[1]] == 1, "{", "}"], W[[j]][[2]] + 1],
{j, 1, Length[W]}]; ToExpression[d][[1]]]
In[326]:= L = {a, m, n, {{b}, {c}, {{m, {{{"g"}}}, n, {{{{{gs}}}}}}}}, d};
In[327]:= RestNestList[L, gsv]
Out[327]= {a, m, n, {{b}, {c}, {{m, {{{"g"}}}, n, {{{{{gs}}}}}}}}, d}
In[328]:= gsv
Out[328]= {a, m, n, b, c, m, "g", n, gs, d}
Using the ElemsOnLevels2 procedure [8,16], it is possible
to program a procedure allowing to process by the set symbol
the list elements which are determined by their arrangements
on nesting levels and their location at the nested levels. The call
SymbToElemList[x, {m, n}, s] returns the result of application of
a symbol s to an element of a list x which is located on a nesting
level m, and be n–th element at this nesting level. The nested
list {{m1, n1}, …, {mp, np}} can be as the second argument of the
SymbToElemList, allowing to execute processing by means of s
symbol the elements of the x list whose locations are defined by
pairs {mj, nj} (j = 1..p) of the above format. At that, the structure
of the initial x list is preserved. The fragment below represents
source code of the procedure and examples of its application.
In[1118]:= Lst = {s, "a", g, {{{{{}}}}}, b, 72, m, c, m, {f, d, 77, s, h, m,
{m + p, {{}}, n, 50, p, a}}};
177
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
In[1119]:= SymbToElemList[x_ /; ListQ[x],
y_ /; NonNegativeIntListQ[y] && Length[y] == 2 ||
ListListQ[y] && And1[Map[Length[#] == 2 &&
NonNegativeIntListQ[#] &, y]], G_Symbol] :=
Module[{a, b, c, d, h, g = If[ListListQ[y], y, {y}], f, n = 1, u},
SetAttributes[d, Listable];
f = ReplaceAll[x, {} –> Set[u, {FromCharacterCode[6]}]];
h = Flatten[f]; a = ElemsOnLevels2[f];
d[t_] := "g" <> ToString[n++]; c = Map[d[#] &, f];
h = GenRules[Map["g" <> ToString[#] &, Range[1, Length[h]]], h];
SetAttributes[b, Listable]; a = ElemsOnLevels2[c];
Do[b[t_] := If[MemberQ[a, {t, g[[j]][[1]], g[[j]][[2]]}], G[t], t];
Set[c, Map[b[#] &, c]], {j, 1, Length[g]}];
ReplaceAll[ReplaceAll[c, h], {G[u[[1]]] –> G[], u –> {}}]]
In[1120]:= SymbToElemList[Lst, {{4, 1}, {6, 1}, {3, 1}, {1, 1}, {5, 1},
{1, 6}, {2, 3}}, S]
Out[1120]= {S[s], "a", g, {{{{{S[]}}}}}, b, 72, S[m], c, m, {f, d, S[77], s,
h, m, {S[m + p], {{S[]}}, n, 50, p, a}}}
In[1121]:= SymbToElemList[{{}, {{{}}, {{{}}}}}, {{2, 1}, {4, 1}, {5, 1}}, G]
Out[1121]= {{G[]}, {{{G[]}}, {{{G[]}}}}}
Unlike the previous tool, the SymbToLevelsList procedure
provides processing by a symbol of all elements of a list which
are located at the set nesting levels [12-16]. Using the procedure
ElemsOnLevels2, it is possible to program the ExpandLevelsList
procedure allowing to expand a list by means of inserting into
the set positions (nestings levels and sequential numbers on them)
of a certain list. Using the ElemOfLevels procedure the useful
testing procedure can be programmed, namely. The procedure
call DispElemInListQ[x,y,n,j] returns True if an y element – j-th
on n nesting level of a nonempty x list, and False otherwise. In
addition to the above tools of processing of the nested lists the
following function is an useful enough tool. The function call
ElemOnLevelListQ[x, y, n] returns True, if an element y belongs
to the n–th nesting level of a list x, and False otherwise. When
processing of sublists in the lists is often need of check of the
existence fact of sublists overlaping that entere to the lists. The
procedure call SubListOverlapQ[x, y, z] returns True, if a list x
178
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
on a nesting level z contains overlapping sublists y, and False
otherwise. Whereas the call SubStrOverlapQ[x, y, z, n] through
optional n argument – an indefinite symbol – additionally returns
the list of consecutive quantities of overlapings of the y sublist
on the z nesting level of the x list. In a case of the nesting level z
nonexisting for the x list, the procedure call returns $Failed with
printing of the appropriate message [7,9,10-16].
In some programming problems that use the list structures
arises a quite urgent need of replacement of values of a list that
are located at the set nesting levels. The standard functions of
the Mathematica don't give this opportunity. In this regard the
procedure has been created whose call ReplaceLevelList[x,n,y,z]
returns the result of the replacement of y element of a list x that
is located at a nesting level n onto a value z. The lists that have
identical length also can act as arguments y, n and z. In a case of
violation of the set condition the procedure call returns $Failed.
In a case of lack of the 4th optional z argument the procedure
call ReplaceLevelList[x, n, y] returns the result of removal of y
elements which are located on a nesting level n of the x list. The
following fragment represent source code of the procedure and
some typical examples of its application.
In[7]:= ReplaceLevelList[x_ /; ListQ[x], n_ /; IntegerQ[n] &&
n > 0 || IntegerListQ[n], y_, z___] :=
Module[{a, c = Flatten[x], d, b = SetAttributes[ToString4, Listable],
h = FromCharacterCode[2], k, p = {}, g = FromCharacterCode[3],
u = FromCharacterCode[4], m, n1 = Flatten[{n}],
y1 = Flatten[{y}], z1},
If[{z} != {}, z1 = Flatten[{z}], z1 = y1];
If[Length[DeleteDuplicates[Map[Length, {n1, y1, z1}]]] != 1,
$Failed, a = ToString4[x]; SetAttributes[StringJoin, Listable];
b = ToExpression[ToString4[StringJoin[u, a, g <> h]]];
b = ToString[b]; m = StringPosition[b, h]; d = LevelsOfList[x];
b = StringReplacePart[ToString[b], Map[ToString, d], m];
For[k = 1, k <= Length[n1], k++, AppendTo[p, u <>
Map[ToString4, y1][[k]] <> g <> Map[ToString, n1][[k]] –>
If[{z} == {}, "", Map[ToString, z1][[k]]]]];
b = StringReplace[b, p]; d = Map[g <> # &, Map[ToString, d]];
179
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
Map[ClearAttributes[#, Listable] &, {StringJoin, ToString4}];
ToExpression[StringReplace[b, Flatten[{u –> "", ", }" –> "}",
"{," –> "{", ", ," –> ",", " , ," –> "", " , " –> "", GenRules[d, ""]}]]]]]
In[8]:= p := {a, j, n, {{b + d}, {c}, {{m, {{{g}}}, n, {{{{{gsv, vgs}}}}}}}}, d};
In[9]:= ReplaceLevelList[p, {3, 9}, {b + d, gsv}, {Art, Kr}]
Out[9]= {a, j, n, {{Art}, {c}, {{m, {{{g}}}, n, {{{{{Kr, vgs}}}}}}}}, d}
In[10]:= ReplaceLevelList[p, 9, gsv, Art]
Out[10]= {a, j, n, {{b + d}, {c}, {{m, {{{g}}}, n, {{{{{Art, vgs}}}}}}}}, d}
The call MapAt[f,e,n] of the built-in MapAt function applies
f to an element at position n in an e expression; whereas other
its formats allow to apply f to the elements at the set positions
in the e expression. At the same time, the following procedure
allows to apply f to elements located on the set nesting levels
with the set sequential numbers on the these nesting levels in a
list. The procedure call MapAtLevelsList[f,x,y] returns the result
of applying of f to the elements of a list x that are located on the
set nesting levels L1,…,Lk with the set sequential numbers p1,
…, pk on these nesting levels; at that, the second argument is a
y ListList–list of the format {{L1, p1}, …, {Lk, pk}}, as examples
below a rather visually illustrate. Whereas the procedure call
MapAtLevelsList[f, x, y, z] with third optional z argument – an
indefined symbol – through it additionally returns the ListList list
whose elements are three–elements sublists for which the first
elements define elements of the list Flatten[x], the 2nd elements
define their positions in the Flatten[x] list, and the 3rd elements
define their nesting levels in the x list. On a list x of the format
{{{...{{...}}...}}} the procedure call returns {{{...{{f[]}}...}}}. Whereas
the call MapAtLevelsList[f, x, y, z] additionally thru the optional
z argument returns the list of format {{{}, 1, MaxLevel[x]}}. This
procedure is of interest in the problems of the lists processing.
The fragment below represents source code of the procedure
along with typical examples of its application.
In[27]:= MapAtLevelsList[f_ /; SymbolQ[f], x_ /; ListQ[x],
y_ /; ListListQ[y], z___] :=
Module[{a, b, c = FromCharacterCode[2], d, g, p, n = 1, s},
s = ReplaceAll[x, {} –> {c}]; a = LevelsOfList[s]; d = ClusterList[a];
b = Map[c <> # &, Map[ToString, y]];
180
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
f[t_] := {"(" <> If[t === Null, "f[]", ToString1[t]] <> ")" <> c <>
ToString[d[[n++]]]}[[1]]; d = MapListAll[f, s]; Clear[f];
g[t_] := If[MemberQ[b, StringTake[t,
{Set[p, Flatten[StringPosition[t, c]][[–1]]], –1}]],
ToString[f] <> "[" <> StringTake[t, {1, p – 1}] <> "]",
StringTake[t, {1, p – 1}]]; SetAttributes[g, Listable];
If[{z} != {} && NullQ[z], z = ReplaceAll[Map[{Flatten[s][[#]], #,
a[[#]]} &, Range[1, Length[a]]], "\.02" –> {}], 77];
n = ToExpression[Map[g, d]]; n = ReplaceAll[n, "\.02" –> Null];
ReplaceAll[n, {f[Null] –> f[], {Null} –> {}}]]
In[28]:= MapAtLevelsList[f, {a, b, c, {{x, y, z}, {{m, n*t, p}}}, c, d},
{{1, 1}, {1, 5}, {3, 3}, {4, 2}}]
Out[28]= {f[a], b, c, {{x, y, f[z]}, {{m, f[n t], p}}}, c, f[d]}
In[29]:= MapAtLevelsList[f, {{{{{a, b, c}, {x, y, z}}}}}, {{5, 1}, {5, 5},
{5, 3}}, g72]
Out[29]= {{{{{f[a], b, f[c]}, {x, f[y], z}}}}}
In[30]:= g72
Out[30]= {{a, 1, 5}, {b, 2, 5}, {c, 3, 5}, {x, 4, 5}, {y, 5, 5}, {z, 6, 5}}
Unlike the MapAtLevelsList the MapAtLevelsList1 allows
to apply a set of functions to the specified elements of a list that
are depended on a nesting level at which they are located. The
call MapAtLevelsList1[x, y, z] returns the result of applying of
a function from a list z to the elements of a list x that are located
on a set nesting levels L1,…,Lk with the set sequential numbers
p1,…,pk on these nesting levels; in addition, the 2nd argument is
a list y of the form {{L1, p1},…,{Lk, pk}}. While the 3rd argument
is a list z of the form {{F1, L1},...,{Fp, Lp}} where a sublist {Fj, Lj}
defines applying of a Fj function on a nesting level Lj. In a case
if in the list z there are different functions at the same level, then
only the first of them is used. The given procedure is of a certain
interest in problems of the lists processing [6,8,10-16]. At last,
the SymbolToLevelsList procedure gives possibility to apply a
function to all elements of the set nesting levels of a list x. The
call SymbolToLevelsList[x, m, Sf] returns the list structurally
similar to a list x and to its elements at the nesting levels m (list
or separate integer) function Sf is applied. In a case of absence of
real nesting levels in m (i.e. nonexisting levels in the x list) the call
returns $Failed with printing of the appropriate message [8,16].
181
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
The standard ReplaceList function attempts to transform
an expression by applying a rule or list of rules in all possible
ways, and returns the list of the results obtained. The following
procedure is an useful enough modification of the ReplaceList
function. The call ReplaceList1[x, y, z, p] returns the list that is
the result of replacement in a list x of elements whose positions
are determined by a list y at a nesting level p onto appropriate
expressions that are defined by a list z. In addition, if a certain
element should be deleted, in the z list the key word "Nothing"
is coded in the appropriate position. The procedure processes
the main espesial situations. The following fragment represents
source code of the procedure and examples of its application.
In[7]:= ReplaceList1[x_ /; ListQ[x], y_ /; IntegerListQ[y],
z_ /; ListQ[z], p_ /; IntegerQ[p]] :=
Module[{a = MaxLevelList[x], b, c = {}},
If[Length[y] != Length[z], Print["The 2nd and 3rd arguments
have different lengths"]; $Failed,
If[p > a, Print["The given nesting level is more than maximal"];
$Failed, b = Level[x, {p}];
Do[AppendTo[c, If[y[[j]] <= Length[b], b[[y[[j]]]] –> If[z[[j]] ===
"Nothing", Nothing, z[[j]]], Nothing]], {j, 1, Length[y]}];
If[c == {}, x, Replace[x, c, {p}]]]]]
In[8]:= L := {a,b, {{a,b}, {{m,n, {p, {{{}}}}}}}, c, {}, m,n,p, {{{{a*b}, g}}}}
In[9]:= ReplaceList1[L, {1, 2, 5}, {Avz, Agn, Vsv}, 4]
Out[9]= {a,b,{{a,b},{{Avz,Agn,{p,{{{}}}}}}},c,{},m,n,p,{{{{a*b},Vsv}}}}
In[10]:= ReplaceList1[L, {1, 2}, {{Avz, Agn}, {77, 72}}, 2]
Out[10]= {a, b, {{Avz, Agn}, {77, 72}}, c, {}, m, n, p, {{{{a*b}, g}}}}
The InsertToList procedure is based on the above procedure
ReplaceList1 and Sequences [8,16] and attempts to transform a
list by including of expressions in the tuples of its elements that
are located on the set nesting level. The InsertToList procedure
is a rather useful modification of the built-in Insert function. The
procedure call InsertToList[x, y, z, h, p] returns the list that is the
result of inserting into x list on a nesting level p of expressions
from a list z; the positions for inserting are defined by means of
the appropriate y list which defines the positions of elements of
the x list on the p–th nesting level [7,10-16].
182
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
Using the ElemsOnLevels2 procedure [16], it is possible to
program the procedure allowing to expand a list by means of
inserting into the given positions (nestings levels and sequential
numbers on them) of the list. The call ExpandLevelsList[x, y, z]
returns the result of inserting of the z list to a nesting level m
relative to n–th position at this nesting level; at that, the second
y argument in common case is a nested list {{m, n}, p},...,{mt, nt},
pt}}, allowing to execute inserting to positions, whose locations
are defined by pairs {mj, nj} {j=1..t} (nestings levels and sequential
numbers on them), whereas pt∈
∈{1, –1, 0} defines insertion at the
right, at the left and at situ relative to the set position. Thus, the
argument y has the format {{m, n}, p}, or the kind of the above
nested list {{m, n}, p},...,{mt, nt}, pt}}. At that, the structure of an
initial x list is preserved.
In[2385]:= ExpandLevelsList[x_ /; ListQ[x], y_, z_ /; ListQ[z]] :=
Module[{a, b, c, d, h, g = If[Length[Flatten[y]] == 3, {y}, y], f,
n = 1, u, p = ToString[z]}, SetAttributes[d, Listable];
f = ReplaceAll[x, {} –> Set[u, {FromCharacterCode[2]}]];
h = Flatten[f]; a = ElemsOnLevels2[f];
d[t_] := "g" <> ToString[n++]; c = Map[d[#] &, f];
h = GenRules[Map["g" <> ToString[#] &, Range[1, Length[h]]], h];
SetAttributes[b, Listable]; a = ElemsOnLevels2[c];
Do[b[t_] := If[MemberQ[a, {t, g[[j]][[1]][[1]], g[[j]][[1]][[2]]}],
If[g[[j]][[2]] == –1, p <> "," <> t, If[g[[j]][[2]] == 1, t <> "," <> p, p, 7]], t];
Set[c, Map[b[#] &, c]], {j, 1, Length[g]}];
c = ToExpression[ToString[c]];
ReplaceAll[ReplaceAll[c, Map[ToExpression[#[[1]]] –>
#[[2]] &, h]], u[[1]] –> {}]]
In[2386]:= ExpandLevelsList[{a, d, {b, h, {c, d}}}, {{{1, 1}, 1},
{{2, 1}, 0}, {{3, 1}, –1}}, {{x, y, z}}]
Out[2386]= {a, {{x, y, z}}, d, {{{x, y, z}}, h, {{{x, y, z}}, c, d}}}
In[2387]:= ExpandLevelsList[{a, d, {b, h, {c, d}}}, {{{1, 1}, 1},
{{2, 1}, 0}, {{3, 1}, –1}}, {{}}]
Out[2387]= {a, {{}}, d, {{{}}, h, {{{}}, c, d}}}
In[2388]:= ExpandLevelsList[{}, {{1, 1}, 0}, MultiEmptyList[7]]
Out[2388]= {{{{{{{{}}}}}}}}
The procedure is widely used by tools processing list structures.
183
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
The following rather simple procedure is intended for the
grouping of elements of a list according to their multiplicities.
The procedure call GroupIdentMult[x] returns the nested list of
the following format:
{{{n1}, {x1, x2,…,xa}}, {{n2}, {y1, y2,…,yb}}, …, {{nk}, {z1, z2,…,zc}}}
where {xi, yj, …, zp} are elements of a list x and {n1, n2, …, nk} –
multiplicities corresponding to them {i = 1..a, j = 1..b,…,p = 1..c}.
The fragment below represents the source code of the procedure
along with typical examples of its application.
In[1287]:= GroupIdentMult[x_ /; ListQ[x]] :=
Module[{a = Gather[x], b},
b = Map[{DeleteDuplicates[#][[1]], Length[#]} &, a];
b = Map[DeleteDuplicates[#] &,
Map[Flatten, Gather[b, SameQ[#1[[2]], #2[[2]]] &]]];
b = Map[{{#[[1]]}, Sort[#[[2 ;; –1]]]} &, Map[Reverse,
Map[If[Length[#] > 2, Delete[Append[#, #[[2]]], 2], #] &, b]]];
b = Sort[b, #1[[1]][[1]] > #2[[1]][[1]] &];
If[Length[b] == 1, Flatten[b, 1], b]]
In[1288]:= L = {a, c, b, a, a, c, g, d, a, d, c, a, c, c, h, h, h, h, h, g, g};
In[1289]:= GroupIdentMult[L]
Out[1289]= {{{5}, {a, c, h}}, {{3}, {g}}, {{2}, {d}}, {{1}, {b}}}
In[1290]:= GroupIdentMult[{a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a}]
Out[1290]= {{15}, {a}}
In[1291]:= GroupIdentMult[RandomInteger[2, 47]]
Out[1291]= {{{19}, {2}}, {{16}, {0}}, {{12}, {1}}}
In[1292]:= GroupIdentMult[RandomInteger[42, 77]]
Out[1292]= {{{4}, {9, 20, 24, 32, 34}}, {{3}, {0, 2, 5, 12, 17, 18}},
{{2}, {3, 4, 8, 15, 16, 19, 21, 22, 25, 31, 35, 40, 41}},
{{1}, {6, 7, 10, 11, 14, 26, 28, 29, 30, 37, 38, 39, 42}}}
In[1293]:= Sum[%[[k]][[1]]*Length[%[[k]][[2]]], {k, 1, Length[%]}][[1]]
Out[1293]= 77
In addition, elements of the returned nested list are sorted
in decreasing order of multiplicities of elements groups of the
initial x list. In a number of problems dealing with structures of
list type the procedure is of a certain interest. That procedure is
used in a number of tools of the MathToolBox package [16].
184
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
Note, along with above means we have programmed a lot
of other means for processing lists, which are intended both for
mass application and in special cases. Some are original, while
others to varying degrees extend the functionality of the built-in
means or extend their applicability. All these tools are included
in the attached package MathToolBox [16].
3.6. Additional tools for the Mathematica
Here we will present some of the additional tools created at
using of Mathematica for the programming of applications and
in preparation of a series of books on computer algebra systems.
The following procedure expands the standard MemberQ
function onto the nested lists, its call MemberQL[x, y] returns
True if an expression y belongs to any nesting level of list x, and
False otherwise. While the call with the 3rd optional z argument
– an indefinite variable – in addition through z returns the list of
the ListList type, the first element of each its sublist determines
a level of the x list, whereas the second determines quantity of
y elements on this level provided that the main output is True,
otherwise z remains undefinite. The fragment below represents
source code of the procedure with typical example of its use.
In[2144]:= MemberQL1[x_ /; ListQ[x], y_, z___] :=
Module[{a = MaxLevel[x], b = {}, c = {}, k = 0},
Do[AppendTo[b, Count[Level[x, {j}], y]], {j, a}];
If[Plus[Sequences[b]] >= 1, If[SymbolQ[z], Map[{k++,
If[# != 0, AppendTo[c, {k, #}], 72]} &, b], 77]; z = c; True, False]]
In[2145]:= MemberQL1[{a, b, {c, d, {f, d, h, d}, s, {p, w, {n, m, d,
d, r, u, d, {x, d, {d, m, n, d}, d, y}}, t}}, x, y, z}, d, agn]
Out[2145]= True
In[2146]:= agn
Out[2146]= {{2, 1}, {3, 2}, {4, 3}, {5, 2}, {6, 2}}
In[2147]:= MemberQL1[Flatten[{a, b, {c, d, {f, d, h, d}, s, {p, w,
{n, m, d, d, r, u, d}, t}}, x, y, z}], d, avz]
Out[2147]= True
In[2148]:= avz
Out[2148]= {{1, 6}}
185
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
At programming of certain procedures of access to files has
been detected the expediency of creation of a procedure useful
also in other appendices. Therefore, the procedure PosSubList
has been created, whose call PosSubList[x, y] returns the nested
list of initial and final elements for entrance into a simple x list
of the tuple of elements set by a list y. The fragment represents
the source code of the procedure and an example of its use.
In[7]:= PosSubList[x_ /; ListQ[x], y_ /; ListQ[y]] :=
Module[{d, a = ToString1[x], b = ToString1[y],
c = FromCharacterCode[16]}, d = StringTake[b, {2, –2}];
If[! StringFreeQ[a, d], b = StringReplace[a, d –> c <> "," <>
StringTake[ToString1[y[[2 ;; –1]]], {2, –2}]];
Map[{#, # + Length[y] – 1} &,
Flatten[Position[ToExpression[b], ToExpression[c]]]], {}]]
In[8]:= PosSubList[{a, a, b, a, a, a, b, a, x, a, b, a, y, z, a, b, a}, {a, b, a}]
Out[8]= {{2, 4}, {6, 8}, {10, 12}, {15, 17}}
The above approach once again illustrates incentive motives
and prerequisites for programming of the user tools expanding
the Mathematica software. Many of tools of our MathToolBox
package appeared exactly in this way. So, the both procedures
Gather1 and Gather2 a little extend the built-in function Gather,
being an useful in a number of applications [8,12-16].
The following group of means serves for sorting of lists of
various type. Among them can be noted such as SortNL, SortLS,
SortNL1, SortLpos, SortNestList. For example, the procedure call
SortNestList[x,p,y] returns the sorting result of a nested numeric
or symbolic list x by p–th element of its sub-lists according to the
sorting functions Less, Greater for numeric lists, and SymbolLess,
SymbolGreater for symbolic lists. In both cases a nested list with
the nesting level <3 as actual x argument is supposed, otherwise
an initial x list is returned. In addition, in a case of symbolic lists
the comparison of elements is carried out on the basis of their
character codes. The following fragment represents source code
of the procedure with typical example of its application.
In[76]:= SortNestList[x_ /; NestListQ[x], p_ /; PosIntQ[p], y_] :=
Module[{a = DeleteDuplicates[Map[Length, x]], b},
186
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
b = If[AllTrue[Map[ListNumericQ, x], TrueQ] &&
MemberQ[{Greater, Less}, y], y,
If[AllTrue[Map[ListSymbolQ, x], TrueQ] &&
MemberQ[{SymbolGreater, SymbolLess}, y], y],
Return[Defer[SortNestList[x, p, y]]]];
If[Min[a] <= p <= Max[a], Sort[x, b[#1[[p]], #2[[p]]] &],
Defer[SortNestList[x, p, y]]]]
In[77]:= SortNestList[{{42, 47, 72}, {77, 72, 52}, {30, 23}}, 2, Less]
Out[77]= {{30, 23}, {42, 47, 72}, {77, 72, 52}}
Sorting of a nested list at the nesting levels composing it is
of quite certain interest. In this regard the following procedure
can be a rather useful tool. The call SortOnLevel[x, m] returns
the sorting result of a list x at its nesting level m [16]. Whereas
the SortOnLevels procedure is a rather natural generalization
of the previous procedure. The call SortOnLevels[x,m,sf] where
optional sf argument – a sorting pure function analogously to
the previous procedure returns the sorting result of x list at its
nesting levels m. Furthermore, as an argument m can be used a
single level, the levels list or "All" word which determines all
nesting levels of the x list which are subject to sorting. If all m
levels are absent then the call returns $Failed with printing of
the appropriate message, otherwise the call prints the message
concerning only levels absent in the x list. It must be kept in
mind, that by default the sorting is made in symbolic mode, i.e.
all elements of the sorted x list before sorting by means of the
built-in Sort function are presented in the string format. While
the call SortOnLevels[x, m, sf] returns the sorting result of a list
x at its nesting levels m depending on a sorting pure sf function
that is the optional argument. The following fragment represents
source code of the procedure and examples of its application.
In[75]:= SortOnLevels[x_ /; ListQ[x], m_ /; IntegerQ[m] ||
IntegerListQ[m] || m === All, sf___] :=
Module[{a, b, c = ReplaceAll[x, {} –> {Null}], d, h, t, g, s},
a = LevelsOfList[c]; d = Sort[DeleteDuplicates[a]];
If[m === All || SameQ[d, Set[h,
Sort[DeleteDuplicates[Flatten[{m}]]]]], t = d,
If[Set[g, Intersection[h, d]] == {},
187
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
Print["Levels " <> ToString[h] <> " are absent in the list; " <>
"nesting levels must belong to " <> ToString[Range[1, Max[d]]]];
Return[$Failed], t = g; s = Select[h, ! MemberQ[d, #] &];
If[s == {}, Null, Print["Levels " <> ToString[s] <>
" are absent in the list; " <> "nesting levels must belong to " <>
ToString[Range[1, Max[d]]]]]]];
Map[Set[c, SortOnLevel[c, #, sf]] &, t];
ReplaceAll[c, Null –> Nothing]]
In[76]:= SortOnLevels[{b, t, "c", {{3, 2, 1, {g, s*t, a}, k, 0}, 2, 3, 1},
1, 2, {{m, n, f}}, {{2, 3, 6, {{{g, f, d, s, m}}}}}}, 7, 8]
Levels {7} are absent in the list;
nesting levels must belong to {1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6}
Out[76]= $Failed
In[77]:= SortOnLevels[{b, t, "c", {{3, 2, 1, {g, s*t, a}, k, 0}, 2, 3, 1},
1, 2, {{m, n, f}}, {{2, 3, 6, {{{g, f, d, s, m}}}}}}, 6]
Out[77]= {b, t, "c", {{3, 2, 1, {g, s*t, a}, k, 0}, 2, 3, 1}, 1, 2, {{m, n, f}},
{{2, 3, 6, {{{d, f, g, m, s}}}}}}
The procedure call SortOnLevel[x, m] returns the sorting
result of a list x at its nesting level m. If the m level is absent, the
procedure call returns $Failed, printing the appropriate message.
It must be kept in mind that by default the sorting is made in
the symbolic format, i.e. all elements of the sorted x list will be
represented in the string format. Whereas the procedure call
SortOnLevel[x, m, Sf] returns the sorting result of the x list at its
nesting level m depending on the sorting pure Sf function that
is the optional argument. In addition, the cross-cutting sorting
at the set nesting level is made. The fragment below represents
source code of the procedure and an example of its application.
In[10]:= SortOnLevel[x_ /; ListQ[x], m_ /; IntegerQ[m], Sf___] :=
Module[{a, b = ReplaceAll[x, {} –> {Null}], c, d, f, g, h = {}, n = 1,
p, v}, a = LevelsOfList[b]; d = DeleteDuplicates[a];
If[! MemberQ[d, m],
Print["Level " <> ToString[m] <> " is absent in the list; " <>
"nesting level must belong to " <> ToString[Range[1, Max[d]]]];
$Failed, f[t_] := "(" <> ToString1[t] <> ")" <> "_" <>
ToString1[a[[n++]]]; SetAttributes[f, Listable]; c = Map[f, b];
g[t_] := If[SuffPref[t, "_" <> ToString[m], 2], AppendTo[h, t], Null];
SetAttributes[g, Listable]; Map[g, c];
188
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
p = Sort[Map[StringTake[#, {1, Flatten[StringPosition[#, "_"]]
[[–1]] – 1}] &, h], Sf]; n = 1;
v[t_] := If[ToExpression[StringTake[t, {Flatten[StringPosition[t,
"_"]][[–1]] + 1, –1}]] == m, p[[n++]],
StringTake[t, {1, Flatten[StringPosition[t, "_"]][[–1]] – 1}]];
SetAttributes[v, Listable]; c = ToExpression[Map[v, c]];
ReplaceAll[c, Null –> Nothing]]]
In[11]:= SortOnLevel[{p, b, a, u, c, {{{n, {h, f, c}, m}}}, 3, 2, 1}, 1]
Out[11]= {1, 2, 3, a, b, {{{n, {h, f, c}, m}}}, c, p, u}
Along with the above and other similar means [8-16,22], a
procedure whose call ElemsOnLevel[x] returns the format of a
list x with its internal structure preserved is of great interest but
instead of its elements there are 3–element lists, where as their
1st element – element of the x list, the 2nd element – its position
in the Flatten[x] list and the third element – its nesting level in
the x list (see fragment below).
In[7]:= ElemsOnLevel[x_ /; ListQ[x]] := Module[{d, f, f1, f2, n = 1,
p, z = "\[InvisibleComma]"},
f[t_] := ToString1[t] <> z <> ToString[n++];
f1[t_] := ToString[t] <> z <> ToString[p[[n++]]];
f2[t_] := ToExpression[StringSplit[t, z]];
Map[SetAttributes[#, Listable] &, {f, f1, f2}];
p = LevelsOfList[x]; d = Map[f,x]; n=1; d = Map[f1,d]; Map[f2,d]]
In[8]:= ElemsOnLevel[{{{{a, b}}}, {c, d, m, {{n, d}}}, s, g, {a, k}}]
Out[8]= {{{{{a, 1, 4}, {b, 2, 4}}}}, {{c, 3, 2}, {d, 4, 2}, {m, 5, 2},
{{{n, 6, 4}, {d, 7, 4}}}}, {s, 8, 1}, {g, 9, 1}, {{a, 10, 2}, {k, 11, 2}}}
The procedure is quite useful in solving of the number the
problems of processing nested lists and in combination with
the above–mentioned tools it extends the functional component
of Mathematica in this direction. In particular, the procedure is
useful in solving the task of testing the continuous distribution
of elements at a set nesting level of a list. The problem is solved
by means of SolidLevelQ procedure, represented below.
In[432]:= SolidLevelQ[x_ /; ListQ[x], n_ /; IntegerQ[n], y___] :=
Module[{a = ElemsOnLevel[x], b, c, p, t = 0},
If[MemberQ[Range[1, c = MaxLevel[x]], n],
b = Partition[Flatten[a], 3]; b = Select[b, #[[3]] == n &];
189
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
If[b == {}, Goto[j], b = Map[#[[2]] &, b]; a = Range[b[[1]], b[[-1]]];
Do[If[b[[p]] + 1 == b[[p + 1]], Nothing, t++], {p, Length[b] – 1}];
If[a == b, p = True, p = False];
If[p === False && {y} != {} && ! HowAct[y], y = t + 1, 77]; p],
Label[j]; Print["The second argument should be in range " <>
ToString[{1, c}]]; $Failed]]
In[433]:= SolidLevelQ[{3, 2, 1, {{g, s + t, a}, k, 0, 2, 3, 1}, 1, 2, {a, b},
m, n, {c, {d}, t}, g, {d}, f}, 1]
Out[433]= False
In[434]:= SolidLevelQ[{3, 2, 1, {{g, s + t, a}, k, 0, 2, 3, 1}, 1, 2, {a, b},
m, n, {c, {d}, t}, g, {d}, f}, 1, g]
Out[434]= False
In[435]:= g
Out[435]= 5
In[436]:= SolidLevelQ[{5, 6, 7, 8, {9, 11}, 10, 1}, 3]
"The second argument should be in diapazon {1, 2}"
Out[436]= $Failed
In[437]:= SolidLevelQ[{5, 6, 7, 8, {9, {c}, 11}, 10, 1}, 2, svg]
Out[437]= False
In[438]:= svg
Out[438]= 2
In[439]:= SolidLevelQ[{5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 10, 1}, 2]
"The second argument should be in diapazon {1, 1}"
Out[439]= $Failed
In[440]:= SolidLevelQ[{5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 10, 1}, 1]
Out[440]= True
Calling the SolidLevelQ[x, n] procedure returns True if the
elements of a level n of a list x are arranged sequentially, i.e. not
separated by other nesting levels, and False otherwise. Whereas
through optional 3rd argument y – an indefinite variable – the call
SolidLevelQ[x, n, y] returns the number of solid segments of the
elements of the n–th nesting level if the main result is False. The
procedure processes the erroneous situation in a case of invalid
nesting level n with returning value $Failed and printing of the
appropriate message. The previous fragment represents source
code of procedure and the typical examples of its application.
The following procedure should be preceded by a procedure
that allows to do that a list of an arbitrary structure and nesting
190
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
whose all elements are of the form {h}, is result in the list of the
same structure, but with elements of the form h. The procedure
call IntSimplList[x] returns the result of the above restructuring
of a list x of an arbitrary structure and nesting.
In[7]:= IntSimplList[x_ /; ListQ[x]] := Module[{a = ToString1[x],
b = {}, c = {}, d, k, j, p = ""}, d = StringLength[a];
Do[If[StringTake[a, {j}] == "{" && StringTake[a, {j + 1}] != "{",
AppendTo[b, j], 77], {j, d – 1}];
For[k = 1, k <= Length[b], k++, For[j = b[[k]], j <= Infinity, j++,
p = p <> StringTake[a, {j}]; If[SyntaxQ[p], AppendTo[c, j];
Break[], Continue[]]; p = ""]];
ToExpression[StringReplacePart[a, "", Map[{#, #} &, Join[b, c]]]]]
In[8]:= sv := {{{p}, {F[b]}, {a + b}}, {u^3}, {c}, {{{{n/m}, {{"h"}, {c^2},
{g[f]}}, {n^2 + t}}}}, {{y}, {"x"}}}
In[9]:= IntSimplList[sv]
Out[9]= {{p, F[b], a + b}, u^3, c, {{{n/m, {"h", c^2, g[f]}, n^2 + t}}},
{y, "x"}}
By substantially using now the previous procedure, we can
more easily program a procedure that applies a certain symbol
to the desired element of the nested list at a set nesting level.
In[7]:= SymbolToElemOnLevel[F_ /; SymbolQ[F], x_ /; ListQ[x],
n_Integer, m_Integer] :=
Module[{a = ToString1[ElemsOnLevel[x]], b, c, d, g, t, u, s, z},
s[t_] := If[IntegerQ[t], ToString[t], t]; SetAttributes[s, Listable];
z[t_] := If[StringQ[t] && IntegerQ[ToExpression[t]],
ToExpression[t], If[Quiet[Check[Part[t, 0] === F, False]] &&
StringQ[Part[t, 1]] && IntegerQ[Set[u, ToExpression[Part[t, 1]]]],
F[u], t]]; d = Map[s, x]; SetAttributes[z, Listable];
a = ToString1[ElemsOnLevel[d]];
If[n <= MaxLevel[x] – 1 && n > 0, If[Length[Level[x, {n}]] >= m,
b = ReduceAdjacentStr[ReduceAdjacentStr[a, "{", 1], "}", 1];
b = ToExpression["{" <> b <> "}"];
g[t_] := If[IntegerQ[t], Nothing, t]; SetAttributes[g, Listable];
b = Quiet[Check[Select[b, #[[3]] == n &][[m]][[1]],
Return[{Print["No element with number " <> ToString[m] <>
" at level " <> ToString[n]]; $Failed}[[1]]]]];
c = ToString1[b]; b = F @@ {b}; b = ToString1[b];
191
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
t = ToExpression[StringReplace[a, c –> b]];
t = IntSimplList[Map[g, t]]; Map[z, t],
Print["No element with number " <> ToString[m] <> " at level "
<> ToString[n]]; $Failed],
Print["No level with number " <> ToString[n]]; $Failed]]
In[8]:= t := {{p, b, x^2 + y^2, c + b, 7.7, 78, m/n}, u, c^2,
{{{n, {"h", f, {m, n, p}, c}, n + p^2}}}, {y, "x"}}
In[9]:= SymbolToElemOnLevel[F, t, 2, 3]
Out[9]= {{p, b, F[x^2 + y^2], b + c, 7.7, 78, m/n}, u, c^2,
{{{n, {"h", f, {m, n, p}, c}, n + p^2}}}, {y, "x"}}
In[10]:= SymbolToElemOnLevel[F, t, 4, 2]
Out[10]= {{p, b, x^2 + y^2, b + c, 7.7, 78, m/n}, u, c^2,
{{{n, {"h", f, {m, n, p}, c}, F[n + p^2]}}}, {y, "x"}}}
In[11]:= SymbolToElemOnLevel[F, t, 2, 12]
"No element with number 12 at level 2"
Out[11]= $Failed
In[12]:= SymbolToElemOnLevel[F, t, 7, 6]
"No level with number 7"
Out[12]= $Failed
The procedure call SymbolToElemOnLevel[F,x,n,m] returns
the result of applying of a symbol F to an element with number
m of nesting level n of the nested list x. The procedure handles
the erroneous situations due to using of incorrect nesting levels
and elements numbers at nesting levels with return $Failed and
printing of appropriate message. Meantime, at a nesting level n
of form ...{a, b,..., {c},..., d}... only {a, b,..., d} elements other than
lists are considered as elements, and elements of more higher
nesting level p > n, such as {c}, are ignored. The above fragment
represents the source code of the procedure along with typical
examples of its application.
The following procedure is a rather useful generalization of
the previous procedure. The call SymbolToElemOnLevel1[F,x,n]
returns the result of applying of a symbol F to elements of the
nested list x that are defined by a nested list n, coded in the form
of integer nested list {{l1, {p1 ,..., pn}}, …, {lt, {q1, ..., qm}}}. In this
list for elements in form {l1, {p1 ,..., pn}} as the first element l1 is a
nesting level whereas the 2nd element-list are numbers elements
on the set nesting level. In addition, elements of the Integer type
192
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
in the list x are coded in the string format. At the same time, the
procedure handles the erroneous situations which are caused
by the using of incorrect nesting levels and elements numbers
at nesting levels with return $Failed and printing of appropriate
messages. The fragment below represents the source code of the
SymbolToElemOnLevel1 procedure with examples of its use.
In[5]:= SymbolToElemOnLevel1[F_ /; SymbolQ[F],
x_ /; ListQ[x], n_ /; ListQ[n]] :=
Module[{a = x, b, d, m = If[IntegerQ[n[[1]]], {n}, n], t = {}, h = {},
s = {}, v = {}, u, k, j},
d = Gather[LevelsOfList[x]]; d = Map[{#[[1]], Length[#]} &, d];
Map[{s = Flatten[Append[s, d[[#]][[1]]]],
v = Flatten[Append[v, d[[#]][[2]]]]} &, Range[1, Length[d]]];
Map[{AppendTo[t, m[[#]][[1]]], AppendTo[h, Max[m[[#]][[2]]]]} &,
Range[1, Length[m]]];
If[Set[u, Complement[t, s]] != {},
Return[{Print["Levels " <> ToString[u] <>
" are absent"]; $Failed}[[1]]],
For[k = 1, k <= Length[d], k++, For[j = 1, j <= Length[m], j++,
If[d[[k]][[1]] == m[[j]][[1]] && d[[k]][[2]] < Max[m[[j]][[2]]],
Return[{Print["The element numbers greater than the number
of elements on level " <> ToString[d[[k]][[1]]]]; $Failed}[[1]]], 7]]];
Do[Do[a = SymbolToElemOnLevel[F, a, k[[1]], j], {j, k[[2]]}], {k, m}]; a]]
In[6]:= h := {{a, b, c}, c, d, {{{g, v, {m, n, p}, f}}}, {x, y, z}}
In[7]:= SymbolToElemOnLevel1[F, h, {{2, {1, 2, 3, 6}}, {4, {1, 2}},
{5, {1, 2, 3}, {4, {1, 2}}}}]
Out[7]= {{F[a], F[b], F[c]}, F[c], d, {{{F[g], F[v], {F[m], F[n], F[p]}, f}}},
{x, y, F[z]}}
In[8]:= SymbolToElemOnLevel1[F, h, {{2, {1, 4, 6}}, {5, {1, 2, 3}}}]
Out[8]= {{F[a], b, c}, c, d, {{{g, v, {F[m], F[n], F[p]}, f}}},
{F[x], y, F[z]}}
In[9]:= SymbolToElemOnLevel1[F, h, {{2, {1, 4, 6, 7}}, {6, {1, 2, 3}},
{7, {1, 2, 3}}}]
"Levels {6, 7} are absent"
Out[9]= $Failed
In[10]:= SymbolToElemOnLevel1[F, h, {{2, {1, 6, 7}}, {5, {1, 2}}}]
"The element numbers greater than the number of
elements on level 2"
Out[10]= $Failed
193
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
Finally, the simple SymbolToListAll procedure returns the
result of applying of the given S symbol to each element at all
nesting levels of a list x. The following fragment represents the
source code of the procedure with an example of its application.
In[147]:= SymbolToListAll[x_ /; ListQ[x], S_ /; SymbolQ[S]] :=
Module[{a}, SetAttributes[a, Listable]; a[t_] := S @@ {x}; Map[a, x]]
In[148]:= t := {{a, b}, c, m + n, 77, {{{m, {{c + d, n/p}}}}}, {h, "g"}}
In[149]:= SymbolToListAll[t, F]
Out[149]= {{F[a], F[b]}, F[c], F[m + n], F[77], {{{F[m], {{F[c + d],
F[n/p]}}}}}, {F[h], F["g"]}}
The above procedures LevelsOfList, IntSimplList, SolidLevelQ,
SymbolToElemOnLevel, SymbolToElemOnLevel1, SymbolToListAll
are of a certain interest in programming problems related to the
nested lists of an arbitrary structure, extending Mathematica's
built-in means. These means admit a number of modifications,
representing an independent interest too [6-15].
The possibility of exchange by elements of the nested lists
which are located at the different nesting levels is of a certain
interest. The problem is successfully solved by the procedure
SwapOnLevels. The procedure call SwapOnLevels[x, y] returns
the result of exchange of elements of a list x, being at the nesting
levels and with their sequential numbers at these levels that are
defined by the nested list y of the format {{{s1, p1}, {s2, p2}}, ...,
{{sk1, pk1}, {sk2, pk2}}} where a pair {{sj1, pj1}, {sj2, pj2}} defines
replacement of an element which is at the nesting level sj1 with
a sequential number pj1 at this level by an element that is at the
nesting level sj2 with a sequential number pj2 at this level, and
vice versa. In a case of impossibility of such exchange because
of lack of a nesting level sj or/and a sequential number pj the
procedure call prints the appropriate message. In addition, in a
case of absence in the y list of the acceptable pairs for exchange
the procedure call returns $Failed and prints the above message.
The next fragment represents source code of the SortOnLevels
procedure along with typical examples of its application.
In[229]:= L := {b, t, c, {{3, 2, 1, {g, s, a}, k, 0}, 2, 3, 1}, 1, 2, {m, n, f}}
In[230]:= SwapOnLevels[L, {{{1, 5}, {4, 3}}, {{1, 1}, {3, 3}}}]
194
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
Out[230]= {1, t, c, {{3, 2, b, {g, s, 2}, k, 0}, 2, 3, 1}, 1, a, {m, n, f}}
In[231]:= SwapOnLevels[x_ /; ListQ[x], y_ /; ListListQ[y]] :=
Module[{a = ElemsOnLevels2[x], b, c, d, f, g, h, p, n, s, z, u = 0,
w = ReplaceAll[x, {} –> Null]},
g[t_] := "(" <> ToString1[t] <> ")"; SetAttributes[g, Listable];
f[t_] := h[[n++]]; SetAttributes[f, Listable];
s[t_] := ToExpression[t][[1]]; SetAttributes[s, Listable];
Do[z = y[[j]]; n = 1; If[MemberQ5[a, #[[2 ;; 3]] == z[[1]] &] &&
MemberQ5[a, #[[2 ;; 3]] == z[[2]] &],
b = Select[a, #[[2 ;; 3]] == z[[1]] &][[1]];
c = Select[a, #[[2 ;; 3]] == z[[2]] &][[1]];
a = ReplaceAll[a, b –> d]; a = ReplaceAll[a, c –> h];
a = ReplaceAll[a, d –> c]; a = ReplaceAll[a, h –> b];
p = Map[g, w]; h = Map[ToString1, a]; h = Map[s, Map[f, p]], u++;
Print["Pairs " <> ToString[z] <>
" are incorrect for elements swap"]], {j, 1, Length[y]}];
If[u == Length[y], $Failed, ReplaceAll[h, Null –> Nothing]]]
In[232]:= SwapOnLevels[L, {{{{7, 1}, {2, 3}}, {{8, 1}, {3, 3}}}}]
Pairs {{{7, 1}, {2, 3}}, {{8, 1}, {3, 3}}} are incorrect for elements swap
Out[232]= $Failed
A certain interest is the conditional sorting of lists when some
elements in a list are not involved in the sorting, that is, they are
defined as unmovable. The immobility of the elements of the
sorted list is determined by some condition (position, type, etc.).
The SortLcond procedure is one of means solving this problem.
The procedure call SortLcond[x, y, z] returns the sorting result
of a list x according to a sorting function defined by the optional
argument z – a pure function (at absence of z argument the canonical
sorting order is used), provided that the elements of the initial x
list that are defined by a position or their list y are unmovable.
The procedure processes the erroneous positions situation with
returning $Failed with printing of the appropriate messages.
In[14]:= SortLcond[x_ /; ListQ[x], y_ /; IntegerQ[y] ||
IntegerListQ[y], z___ /; PureFuncQ[z]] :=
Module[{a = Flatten[{x}], b = {}, c = Length[x]},
Map[If[# < 1 || # > c, AppendTo[b, #], 7] &, y];
If[b != {}, Print["Positions " <> ToString[b] <> " are invalid"]; $Failed,
195
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
b = Map[{#, a[[#]]} &, y]; Map[{a[[#]] = Nothing} &, y];
a = Sort[a, z];
Do[a = Insert[a, b[[j]][[2]], b[[j]][[1]]], {j, Length[b]}]; a]]
In[15]:= SortLcond[Range[1, 19], {1, 5, 9, 13, 17}, #1 > #2 &]
Out[15]= {1, 19, 18, 16, 5, 15, 14, 12, 9, 11, 10, 8, 13, 7, 6, 4, 17, 3, 2}
In[16]:= SortLcond[Range[1, 19], {0, 5, 21, 27}, #1 > #2 &]
Positions {0, 21, 27} are invalid
Out[16]= $Failed
The natural version of the previous procedure is when the
immobility of the elements of the sorted list is determined by
their type. The SortLcond1 procedure is one of means solving
this problem. The procedure call SortLcond1[x, y, z] returns the
sorting result of a list x according to a sorting function defined
by the optional argument z – a pure function (in a case of absence
of z argument the canonical sorting order is used), provided that the
elements of the initial x list that satisfy a testing pure function y
are unmovable. The following fragment represents source code
of the SortLcond1 procedure with an example of its application.
In[15]:= SortLcond1[x_ /; ListQ[x], y_ /; PureFuncQ[y],
z___ /; PureFuncQ[z]] :=
Module[{a = Flatten[{x}], b = {}, c = Length[x], k = 0},
Map[If[{k++, y @@ {#}}[[2]], AppendTo[b, {k, #}], 77] &, a];
Map[{a[[#]] = Nothing} &, Map[#[[1]] &, b]]; a = Sort[a, z];
Do[a = Insert[a, b[[j]][[2]], b[[j]][[1]]], {j, Length[b]}]; a]
In[16]:= SortLcond1[Range[1, 19], PrimeQ[#] &, #1 > #2 &]
Out[16]= {18, 2, 3, 16, 5, 15, 7, 14, 12, 10, 11, 9, 13, 8, 6, 4, 17, 1, 19}
Conditional sorting of types determined by SortLcond and
SortLcond1 procedures it is simple to extend on the nested lists,
both as a whole and relative to the set nesting levels. We leave
this to the interested reader as a rather useful exercise.
An example is the SortOnLevels procedure, being a rather
natural generalization of the SortOnLevel procedure [8,16]. The
procedure call SortOnLevels[x, m, Sf] where the optional Sf
argument determines a sorting pure function analogously to
the SortOnLevel procedure returns the sorting result of a list x
at its nesting levels m. Furthermore, as an argument m can be
196
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
used a single level, the levels list or the "All" word that defines
all nesting levels of the x list which are subject to sorting. If all
m levels are absent then the procedure call returns $Failed with
printing of appropriate message, otherwise the procedure call
prints the message concerning only levels absent in the x list. It
must be kept in mind, by default the sorting is made in symbolic
format, i.e. all elements of a sorted x list before sorting by means
of the standard Sort function are presented in the string format.
Whereas the procedure call SortOnLevels[x, m, Sf] returns the
sorting result of the x list at its nesting levels m depending on a
sorting pure Sf function that is the optional argument. Fragment
represents source code of the SortOnLevels procedure with an
example of its typical application.
In[7]:= SortOnLevels[x_ /; ListQ[x], m_ /; IntegerQ[m] ||
IntegerListQ[m] || m === All, Sf___] :=
Module[{a, b, c = ReplaceAll[x, {} –> {Null}], d, h, t, g, s},
a = LevelsOfList[c]; d = Sort[DeleteDuplicates[a]];
If[m === All ||
SameQ[d, Set[h, Sort[DeleteDuplicates[Flatten[{m}]]]]], t = d,
If[Set[g, Intersection[h, d]] == {}, Print["Levels " <> ToString[h] <>
" are absent in the list; " <> "nesting levels must belong to " <>
ToString[Range[1, Max[d]]]];
Return[$Failed], t = g; s = Select[h, ! MemberQ[d, #] &];
If[s == {}, Null, Print["Levels " <> ToString[s] <>
" are absent in the list; " <> "nesting levels must belong to " <>
ToString[Range[1, Max[d]]]]]]];
Map[Set[c, SortOnLevel[c, #, Sf]] &, t];
ReplaceAll[c, Null –> Nothing]]
In[8]:= SortOnLevels[{{{3, 4, 5, 0, 8, 7, 9, 1}}, 9, 8, 7, {t, b, c, a, t},
{{6, 3, 3, 5, 2, 9, 8}}}, {1, 2, 3}]
Out[8]= {{{0, 1, 2, 3, 3, 3, 4, 5}}, 7, 8, 9, {a, b, c, t, t}, {{5, 6, 7, 8, 8, 9, 9}}}
The call Replace[e, r, lev] of the built-in function applies the
rules r to parts of a list e specified by the nesting levels lev. In
addition, all rules are applied to all identical e elements of the
lev. An useful enough addition to the Replace function is the
procedure, whose procedure call ReplaceOnLevels[x, y] returns
the result of replacement of elements of a list x, that are at the
197
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
nesting levels and with their sequential numbers at these levels
which are defined by the nested list y of the format {{s1, p1, e1},
{s2, p2, e2},…,{sk, pk, ek}} where sublist {sj, pj, ej} (j = 1..k) defines
replacement of an element that is located at nesting level sj with
sequential number pj at this level by an ej element. If some such
substitution is not possible because of lack of a nesting level sj
or/and a sequential number pj then the procedure call prints
the appropriate message. At the same time, in a case of absence
in the y list of the acceptable values {sj, pj, ej} for replacement
the procedure call returns $Failed with printing of appropriate
message. The fragment represents source code of the procedure
with typical examples of its application.
In[2242]:= ReplaceOnLevels[x_ /; ListQ[x], y_ /; ListQ[y]] :=
Module[{a, b, d = {}, f, g, h, p, n, s, z, u = 0,
w = ReplaceAll[x, {} –> Null], r = If[ListListQ[y], y, {y}]},
a = ElemsOnLevels2[w]; b = Map[#[[2 ;; 3]] &, a];
g[t_] := "(" <> ToString1[t] <> ")"; SetAttributes[g, Listable];
f[t_] := h[[n++]]; SetAttributes[f, Listable];
s[t_] := ToExpression[t][[1]]; SetAttributes[s, Listable];
Do[z = r[[j]]; n = 1; If[MemberQ[b, z[[1 ;; 2]]],
Do[If[a[[k]][[2 ;; 3]] == z[[1 ;; 2]],
AppendTo[d, PrependTo[a[[k]][[2 ;; 3]], z[[3]]]],
AppendTo[d, a[[k]]]], {k, 1, Length[a]}]; a = d; d = {};
p = Map[g, w]; h = Map[ToString1, a]; h = Map[s, Map[f, p]], u++;
Print["Data " <> ToString[z] <> " for replacement are
incorrect"]], {j, 1, Length[r]}];
If[u == Length[r], $Failed, ReplaceAll[h, Null –> Nothing]]]
In[2243]:= ReplaceOnLevels[{t, c, {{{a + b, h}}}, {m, n, f},
{{{{c/d, g}}}}}, {{4, 1, m + n}, {5, 1, Sin[x]}}]
Out[2243]= {t, c, {{{m + n, h}}}, {m, n, f}, {{{{Sin[x], g}}}}}
In[2244]:= ReplaceOnLevels[{t, c, {{{}}}, {m, n, f}, {{{{}}}}},
{{4, 1, m + n}, {3, 1, Sin[x]}}]
Out[2244]= {t, c, {{Sin[x]}}, {m, n, f}, {{{m + n}}}}
In turn, the ReplaceOnLevels1 procedure [16] works similar
to the previous ReplaceOnLevels procedure with an important
difference. The call ReplaceOnLevels1[x, y] returns the result of
replacement of elements of a list x, that are at the nesting levels
198
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
and satisfying set conditions that are defined by the nested list
y of the format {{s1, c1, e1}, {s2, c2, e2},…,{sk, ck, ek}}, where sublist {sj, cj, ej} (j = 1..k) determines replacement of an element that
is located at nesting level sj and satisfies set condition cj by an
ej element. If substitution is not possible because of absence of
a nesting level sj or/and falsity of testing condition cj the call
prints the appropriate message. At the same time, in a case of
lack in y list of any acceptable values {sj, cj, ej} for replacement
the call returns $Failed with print of the appropriate messages.
A rather useful addition to the ReplaceOnLevels procedure
is the procedure whose call ExchangeListsElems[x, y, z] returns
the result of exchange by elements of a list x and a list y that are
located at the nesting levels and with their sequential numbers
at these levels. The receptions that were used at programming
of the procedures LevelsOfList, ElemsOnLevels ÷ ElemsOnLevels2,
SortOnLevel, SwapOnLevels, ReplaceOnLevels, ReplaceOnLevels1
and ExchangeListsElems that are of independent interest are of a
certain interest to the problems dealing with the nested lists [8].
Unlike the built–in Insert function the following procedure
is a rather convenient means for inserting of expressions to the
given place of any nesting level of the list. The procedure call
InsertInLevels[x, y, z] returns the result of inserting in a list x of
expj expressions that are defined by the second y argument of
the form {{lev1, ps1, exp1},…,{levk, psk, expk}} where levj defines
the nesting level of x, psj defines the sequential number of this
element on the level and expj defines an expression that will be
inserted before (z = 1) or after (z = 2) this element (j = 1..k). At
that, on inadmissible pairs {levj, psj} the procedure call prints
the appropriate messages. Whereas, in a case of lack in the y list
of any acceptable {levj, psj} for inserting, the call returns $Failed
with print of the appropriate messages. At the same time, the
4th optional g argument – an indefinite symbol – allows to insert
in the list the required sublists, increasing nesting level of x list
in general. In this case, the expression expj is coded in the form
g[a, b, c, …] which admits different useful compositions as the
examples of the fragment below along with source code of the
199
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
InsertInLevels procedure very visually illustrate.
In[5]:= InsertInLevels[x_ /; ListQ[x], y_ /; ListQ[y],
z_ /; MemberQ[{1, 2}, z], g___] :=
Module[{a, b, c, d, h, f = ReplaceAll[x, {} –> Null], p, u = 0,
r = If[ListListQ[y], y, {y}]}, a = ElemsOnLevels2[f];
b = Map[#[[2 ;; 3]] &, a];
d[t_] := If[StringQ[t] && SuffPref[t, "Sequences[", 1],
ToExpression[t], t]; SetAttributes[d, Listable];
Do[p = r[[j]]; If[Set[h, Select[a, #[[2 ;; 3]] == p[[1 ;; 2]] &]] == {},
u++; Print["Level and/or position " <> ToString[p[[1 ;; 2]]] <>
" are incorrect"], c = If[z == 2,
"Sequences[" <> ToString[{h[[1]][[1]], p[[3]]}] <> "]",
"Sequences[" <> ToString[{p[[3]], h[[1]][[1]]}] <> "]"];
f = Map[d, ReplaceOnLevels[f, {Flatten[{p[[1 ;; 2]], c}]}]]],
{j, 1, Length[r]}];
If[u == Length[r], $Failed, ReplaceAll[f, {If[{g} != {} &&
NullQ[g], g –> List, Nothing], Null –> Nothing}]]]
In[6]:= InsertInLevels[L = {t, c, {{{a + b, h}}}, {m, n, f}, {{{{77, g}}}},
77, 72}, {{4, 1, avz}, {5, 2, agn}}, 1]
Out[6]= {t, c, {{{avz, a + b, h}}}, {m, n, f}, {{{{77, agn, g}}}}, 77, 72}
In[7]:= InsertInLevels[L, {{7, 1, avz}, {5, 2, agn}}, 2]
Level and/or position {7, 1} are incorrect
Out[7]= {t, c, {{{a + b, h}}}, {m, n, f}, {{{{77, g, agn}}}}, 77, 72}
In[8]:= InsertInLevels[{1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9}, {{1, 3, F[{avz, a, b, c}]},
{1, 7, F[{agn, art, kr}]}}, 2, F]
Out[8]= {1, 2, 3, {avz, a, b, c}, 4, 5, 7, {agn, art, kr}, 7, 8, 9}
Unlike the built-in Delete function the following procedure
is a rather convenient means for deleting of expressions on the
given place of any nesting level of the list. The procedure call
DeleteAtLevels[x, y] returns the result of deleting in a list x of
its elements that are determined by the second y argument of
the format {{lev1, ps1}, ..., {levk, psk}}, where levj determines the
nesting level of x and psj defines the sequential number of this
element on the level (j = 1..k). On inadmissible pairs {levj, psj}
the procedure call prints the appropriate messages. Whereas in
a case of lack in the y list of any acceptable {levj, psj} pair for the
deleting, the procedure call returns $Failed with printing of the
200
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
appropriate message. The following fragment represents source
code of the procedure with typical examples of its application.
In[7]:= DeleteAtLevels[x_ /; ListQ[x], y_ /; ListQ[y]] :=
Module[{a, b, c = 0, d, h, f = ReplaceAll[x, {} –> Null],
r = If[ListListQ[y], y, {y}]},
a = ElemsOnLevels2[f]; b = Map[#[[2 ;; 3]] &, a];
d[t_] := If[t === "Nothing", ToExpression[t], t];
SetAttributes[d, Listable];
Do[h = r[[j]]; If[Select[b, # == h &] == {}, c++;
Print["Level and/or position " <> ToString[h] <> " are incorrect"],
f = ReplaceOnLevels[f, {Flatten[{h, "Nothing"}]}]], {j, 1, Length[r]}];
f = Map[d, f];
If[c == Length[r], $Failed, ReplaceAll[f, Null –> Nothing]]]
In[8]:= DeleteAtLevels[{1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10}, {{1, 5}, {1, 8}, {1, 3}}]
Out[8]= {1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 9, 10}
In[9]:= DeleteAtLevels[{t, c, {{{a*b, h}}}, {m, n, f}, {{{{77, g}}}},
77, 72}, {{4, 1}, {4, 2}, {5, 2}, {2, 1}, {2, 3}}]
Out[9]= {t, c, {{{}}}, {n}, {{{{77}}}}, 77, 72}
In a number of cases exists a need of generation of the list
of variables in the form Vk (k = 1..n), where V – a name and n –
a positive integer. The standard functions CharacterRange and
Range of the Mathematica don't solve the problem, therefore
for these purposes it is rather successfully possible to use the
procedures Range1 ÷ Range5, whose source codes with typical
examples of their use can be found in [8,16]. The above tools of
so–called Range group are useful at processing of the lists. So,
the coder–decoder CodeEncode, operating on the principle of
switch, uses 2 functions Range5 and Prime. The procedure call
CodeEncode[x] returns the result of coding of a string x of Latin
printable ASCII–symbols, and vice versa. The CodeEncode1 tool
is a rather useful extension of the above CodeEncode procedure
in the event of datafiles of ASCII format [8,16].
The next group of tools serves for expansion of the built-in
MemberQ function, and its tools are quite useful in work with
list structures. This group is based on procedures MemberQ1 ÷
MemberQ5 which along with procedures MemberT, MemberLN,
MemberQL and MemberQL1 are useful in the lists processing. In
201
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
principle, these means allow interesting enough modifications
significantly broadening the sphere of their application. Source
codes of the above tools of so–called Member–group along with
examples of their application can be found in [8,10-16].
On a basis of the Intersection2 and ElemsOnLevelList [6,12]
procedures the next procedure can be programmed that allows
to receive intersection of the elements of nesting levels of a list.
The procedure call ElemsLevelsIntersect[x] returns the nested
list whose two–element sublists has the format {{n, m}, {{e1, p1},
{e2, p2}, …}}, where {n, m} – the nesting levels of a list x (n ÷ m)
and {ej, pj} determines common ej element for the nesting levels
{n, m}, whereas pj is its common minimal multiplicity for both
nesting levels. In a case of the only list as an argument x the call
returns the empty list, i.e. {}. The following fragment represents
source codes of the Intersection2 and ElemsOnLevelList along
with examples of their application.
In[7]:= Intersection2[x__List] := Module[{a = Intersection[x], b = {}},
Do[AppendTo[b, DeleteDuplicates[Flatten[Map[{a[[j]],
Count[#, a[[j]]]} &, {x}]]]], {j, Length[a]}]; b]
In[8]:= Intersection2[{a + b, a, b, a + b}, {a, a + b, d, b, a + b},
{a + b, b, a, d, a + b}]
Out[8]= {{a, 1}, {b, 1}, {a + b, 2}}
In[9]:= ElemsLevelsIntersect[x_ /; ListQ[x]] :=
Module[{a = ElemsOnLevelList[x], b, c = {}, d, h = {}},
d = Length[a]; Do[Do[If[k == j, Null,
If[Set[b, Intersection2[a[[k]][[2]], a[[j]][[2]]]] != {},
AppendTo[c, {{a[[k]][[1]], a[[j]][[1]]}, b}], Null]], {j, k, d}], {k, d}];
Do[AppendTo[h, {c[[j]][[1]], Map[{#[[1]], Min[#[[2 ;; –1]]]} &,
c[[j]][[2]]]}], {j, Length[c]}]; h]
In[9]:= ElemsLevelsIntersect[{a, c, b, b, c, {b, b, b, c, {c, c, b, b}}}]
Out[9]= {{{1, 2}, {{b, 2}, {c, 1}}}, {{1, 3}, {{b, 2}, {c, 2}}}, {{2, 3}, {{b, 2}, {c, 1}}}}
The procedure call ToCanonicList[x] converts a list x of the
ListList type whose sub-lists have form {a, hj} and/or {{a1,…,ap},
hj}, into equivalent nested classical list where a, ak are elements
of list (k = 1..p) and hj – the nesting levels on which they have to
be in the resultant list. The nested list with any combination of
202
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
sub–lists of the above forms is allowed as the x argument. The
following fragment represents source code of the ToClassicList
procedure with 2 examples of its use which well illustrates the
procedure essence.
In[15]:= ToCanonicList[x_ /; ListQ[x] && ListListQ[x] &&
Length[x[[1]]] == 2] :=
Module[{a, b, c, d, y, v, h, f, m, g = FromCharacterCode[6]},
v[t_] := Join[Map[{{#, t[[2]]}} &, t[[1]]]];
h[t_] := If[ListQ[t[[1]]], Map[{#, t[[2]]} &, t[[1]]], t];
f[t_] := Module[{n = 1}, Map[If[OddQ[n++], #, Nothing] &, t]];
y = Partition[Flatten[Join[Map[If[ListQ[#[[1]]], v[#], {#}] &, x]]], 2];
a = Sort[y, #1[[2]] <= #2[[2]] &];
a = Map[{#[[1]][[-1]], Flatten[#]} &, Gather[a, #1[[2]] == #2[[2]] &]];
a = Map[{#[[1]], Sort[f[#[[2]]]]} &, a]; m = Length[a];
d = Map[#[[1]] &, a]; d = Flatten[{d[[1]], Differences[d]}];
a = Map[{#[[1]], b = #[[2]]; AppendTo[b, g]} &, a];
c = MultiList[a[[1]][[2]], d[[1]] – 1];
Do[c = Quiet[ReplaceAll[c, g –> MultiList[a[[j]][[2]], d[[j]] – 1]]],
{j, 2, m}]; ReplaceAll[c, g –> Nothing]]
In[16]:= ToCanonicList[{{a*b, 2}, {b, 2}, {{z, m, n}, 12}, {c, 4}, {d, 4},
{{n, y, w, z}, 5}, {b, 2}, {m*x, 5}, {n, 5}, {t, 7}, {g, 7}, {x, 12}, {y, 12}}]
Out[16]= {{b, b, a*b, {{c, d, {n, n, w, m*x, y, z, {{g, t,
{{{{{m, n, x, y, z}}}}}}}}}}}}
In[17]:= ToCanonicList[{{a, 1}, {b, 2}, {c, 3}, {d, 4}, {g, 5}, {h, 6}}]
Out[17]= {a, {b, {c, {d, {g, {h}}}}}}
A useful addition to the built-in Level function is procedure
whose call DispLevels[x] returns the list of ListList type from 2–
element sub-lists whose the first element defines the level of the
x list, while the second element determines the level itself of the
x list. The following fragment represents the source code of the
DispLevels procedure with examples of its application.
In[29]:= DispLevels[x_List] := Module[{a = {{1, x}}, b = x, k = 2},
Do[b = Level[b, {1}]; b = Flatten[Map[If[! ListQ[#], Nothing, #] &, b], 1];
AppendTo[a, {k++, b}], MaxLevel[x] – 2]; a]
In[30]:= DispLevels[{a, b, c, {m, {h, g}}, m}]
Out[30]= {{1, {a, b, c, {m, {h, g}}, m}}, {2, {m, {h, g}}}, {3, {h, g}}}
203
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
Using the DispLevels procedure, it is easy to obtain function
whose call ReplaceLL[x, n, y] returns the result of replacing the
n–th level of a list x with an expression y, whereas at using the
word "Nothing" instead of y removes the n–th level of the x list.
The function processes the erroneous situation associated with
an incorrect list nesting level with output of the corresponding
message. The fragment below represents the source code of the
ReplaceLL function with examples of its typical application.
In[27]:= ReplaceLL[x_ /; ListQ[x], n_Integer, y_] :=
If[0 < n && n <= MaxLevel[x],
ReplaceAll[x, DispLevels[x][[n]][[2]] –> y],
Print["Level " <> ToString[n] <> " is invalid"]]
In[28]:= g := {{a, b}, c, d, {{{m, {p, t}, n}}}, x, y}
In[29]:= ReplaceLL[g, 4, {a, b}]
Out[29]= {{a, b}, c, d, {{{a, b}}}, x, y}
In[30]:= ReplaceLL[g, 5, {a, b}]
Out[30]= {{a, b}, c, d, {{{m, {a, b}, n}}}, x, y}
In[31]:= ReplaceLL[g, 5, Nothing]
Out[31]= {{a, b}, c, d, {{{m, n}}}, x, y}
In[32]:= ReplaceLL[g, 7, Nothing]
Level 7 is invalid
A natural extension of the previous ReplaceLL function is
the InsDelRepList procedure, that allows to remove elements,
replace, and insert an element at a set nesting level and in a set
position of the specified nested level of a list. The InsDelRepList
procedure calls define the following:
InsDelRepList[x, n, m, "Del"] – returns the result of deleting of
the m–th element at the n–th nesting level of a list x;
InsDelRepList[x, n, m, "Ins", y] – returns the result of inserting
of an expression y into m–th position at the n–th nesting level of a list
x; at the same time, if m<0 then the inserting is done to the beginning
of the x list, whereas at m > length of a nesting level n the inserting is
done into the end of the level n;
InsDelRepList[x, n, m, "Rep", y] – returns the result of replacing
of an element at m–th position at the n–th nesting level of a list x with
an expression y. The procedure processes the erroneous situation that
is associated with the inadmissible nesting level with return $Failed
204
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
and printing of the corresponding message. The fragment represents
the source code of the procedure with examples of its application.
In[1942]:= InsDelRepList[x_ /; ListQ[x], n_Integer, m_Integer,
h_ /; MemberQ[{"Ins", "Del", "Rep"}, h], y___] :=
Module[{a = DispLevels[x], b, c, d},
If[n <= 0 || n > MaxLevel[x],
Print["Level " <> ToString[n] <> " is invalid"]; $Failed,
b = a[[n]][[2]]; d = ToString[m] <> "–th element is lack";
If[h === "Del", If[Length[b] < m, Print[d]; $Failed,
ReplaceAll[x, b –> Delete[b, m]]],
If[h === "Rep", If[Length[b] < m, Print[d]; $Failed,
ReplaceAll[x, b –> ListAssign2[b, m, y]]],
If[m < 1, c = Prepend[b, y], If[m > Length[b], c = Append[b, y],
c = Insert[b, y, m]]]; ReplaceAll[x, b –> c]]]]]
In[1943]:= g47 := {{a, b}, c, d, {{{m, {p, t}, n}}}, x, y, z}
In[1944]:= InsDelRepList[g47, 5, 1, "Del"]
Out[1944]= {{a, b}, c, d, {{{m, {t}, n}}}, x, y, z}
In[1945]:= InsDelRepList[g47, 5, 2, "Ins", agn]
Out[1945]= {{a, b}, c, d, {{{m, {p, agn, t}, n}}}, x, y, z}
In[1946]:= InsDelRepList[g47, 5, 2, "Rep", avz]
Out[1946]= {{a, b}, c, d, {{{m, {p, avz}, n}}}, x, y, z}
In[1947]:= InsDelRepList[g47, 7, 2, "Rep", avz]
Level 7 is invalid
Out[1947]= $Failed
In[1948]:= InsDelRepList[g47, 5, 0, "Ins", avz]
Out[1948]= {{a, b}, c, d, {{{m, {avz, p, t}, n}}}, x, y, z}
Due to the canonical representation of lists, the procedure
ExchangeLevels is of a certain interest [8,16], returning a list in
canonical form on condition of exchange of its nesting levels. At
that, the procedure below is a useful version of the above tool.
In[47]:= ExchangeLevels1[x_ /; ListQ[x], i_Integer, j_Integer] :=
Module[{a = DispLevels[x]},
If[MemberQ[Map[(# <= 0||# > MaxLevel[x]) &, {i, j}], True],
Print["Levels " <> ToString[{i, j}] <> " are invalid"]; $Failed,
ReplaceAll[ReplaceAll[x, a[[i]][[2]] –> a[[j]][[2]]],
a[[j]][[2]] –> a[[i]][[2]]]]]
In[48]:= ExchangeLevels1[g47, 2, 5]
Out[48]= {{a, b}, c, d, {{{m, {a, b, {{m, {p, t}, n}}}, n}}}, x, y, z}
205
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
The procedure call ExchangeLevels1[x,i,j] returns the result
of exchange of the nesting levels i and j of a nested list x. A quite
naturally there is the problem of exchange of the nesting levels
of 2 various lists that is solved by means of the ListsExchLevels
procedure. Using the method on which the last procedures are
based, it is simple to program the means focused on the typical
manipulations with the nested lists, in particular, removing and
adding of the nesting levels. On the basis of the method used in
the last procedures it is possible to do different manipulations
with the nested lists including also their subsequent converting
in lists of the canonical form [8-10,16]. For example, it is easy to
program a function whose call PosElemOnLevel[x, n, y] returns
positions of an element y on the n–th nesting level of a nested x
list. The function processes the erroneous situation, associated
with the inadmissible nesting level with return $Failed and print
of the corresponding message. Fragment below represents the
source code of the function with examples of its application.
In[3342]:= PosElemOnLevel[x_ /; ListQ[x], n_Integer, y_] :=
If[n <= 0 || n > MaxLevel[x],
Print["Level " <> ToString[n] <> " is invalid"]; $Failed,
Flatten[Position[DispLevels[x][[n]][[2]], y]]]
In[3343]:= g47 := {{a, b}, c, d, {{{m, {g, t, h, g, t, g}, n}}}, x, y, z, q}
In[3344]:= PosElemOnLevel[g47, 5, g]
Out[3344]= {1, 4, 6}
In[3345]:= PosElemOnLevel[g47, 7, g]
Level 7 is invalid
Out[3345]= $Failed
In[3346]:= NumberOnLevels[x_ /; ListQ[x]] :=
Map[{#[[1]], Map[#[[1]] &, Length[#[[2]]]]} &, DispLevels[x]]
In[3347]:= NumberOnLevels[g47]
Out[3347]= {{1, 8}, {2, 3}, {3, 1}, {4, 3}, {5, 6}}
That fragment is ended with a simple function whose call
NumberOnLevels[x] returns the list of ListList type whose first
sub-lists elements define the nesting levels of a list x, while the
second elements define the number of elements at each of these
nesting levels. Means are of interest when working with lists.
206
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
The following procedure provides the sorting of elements of
a list that are located on the set nesting level. The procedure call
SortListOnLevel[x, n, y] returns the result of sorting of elements
of a list x on its nesting level n according to an ordering function
y (an optional argument); in the absence of y argument by default
the sorting according in the standard order is done.
In[7]:= SortListOnLevel[x_ /; ListQ[x], n_Integer, y___] :=
Module[{a = DispLevels[x]},
If[MemberQ[Map[(# <= 0 || # > MaxLevel[x]) &, {n}], True],
Print["Level " <> ToString[n] <> " is invalid"]; $Failed,
ReplaceAll[x, a[[n]][[2]] –> Sort[a[[n]][[2]], y]]]]
In[8]:= SortListOnLevel[g47, 5, ToCharacterCode[ToString[#1]][[1]] >
ToCharacterCode[ToString[#2]][[1]] &]
Out[8]= {{a, b}, c, d, {{{m, {t, t, h, g, g, g}, n}}}, x, y, z, q}
Unlike the standard functions Split, SplitBy the procedure
call Split1[x, y] splits a list x on sub-lists consisting of elements
that are located between occurrences of an element or elements
of list y. If y elements don't belong to the x list, the initial x list is
returned. The following fragment represents source code of the
Split1 procedure with the typical example of its application.
In[7]:= Split1[x_ /; ListQ[x], y_] := Module[{a, b, c = {}, d, h, k = 1},
If[MemberQ3[x, y] || MemberQ[x, y],
a = If[ListQ[y], Sort[Flatten[Map[Position[x, #] &, y]]],
Flatten[Position[x, y]]]; h = a; If[a[[1]] != 1, PrependTo[a, 1]];
If[a[[–1]] != Length[x], AppendTo[a, Length[x]]]; d = Length[a];
While[k <= d – 1, AppendTo[c, x[[a[[k]] ;; If[k == d – 1, a[[k + 1]],
a[[k + 1]] – 1]]]]; k++];
If[h[[–1]] == Length[x], AppendTo[c, {x[[–1]]}]]; c, x]]
In[8]:= Split1[{a, b, a, b, c, d, a, b, a, b, c, d, a, b, d}, {a, c, d}]
Out[8]= {{a, b}, {a, b}, {c}, {d}, {a, b}, {a, b}, {c}, {d}, {a, b, d}, {d}}
At operating with the nested lists, a procedure whose call
Lie[w] returns the result of converting of a source list w into a
structurally similar list whose elements are in the string format
and have length equal to the maximum length of all elements
in the w list at all its nesting levels is of a certain interest. The
following fragment represents the source code of the procedure
with an example of its typical application.
207
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
In[369]:= Lie[x_ /; ListQ[x]] := Module[{a, b = Flatten[x], c, d, f},
SetAttributes[ToString1, Listable]; a = ToString1[b];
c = StringLength[a[[1]]];
Map[If[c < Set[d, StringLength[#]], c = d, 7] &, a];
f[t_, s_] := ToString1[t] <> StringRepeat[" ",
s – StringLength[ToString1[t]]]; SetAttributes[f, Listable];
ClearAttributes[ToString1, Listable]; f[x, c]]
In[370]:= t := {{m, bbbb, g}, {{{n, m, ddd}}}, n, mmmmmm}; Lie[t]
Out[370]= {{"m ", "bbbb ", "g "}, {{{"n ", "m ", "ddd "}}},
"n ", "mmmmmm"}
Using the Lie procedure, in particular, it is possible to easily
program a procedure whose call ContinuousSL[x, y] returns the
result of a сontinuous sort of all the elements of the nested list x
(i.e. ignoring its nesting levels) with retention its internal structure.
The sorting is done either by accepted conventions for the Sort
function or on a basis of the optional y argument defining the
ordering function. The following fragment represents the source
code of the ContinuousSL procedure with examples of its use.
In[2430]:= ContinuousSL[x_ /; ListQ[x], y___] :=
Module[{a = ToString1[Lie[x]], b, c = {}, d},
b = StringLength[a]; Do[d = StringTake[a, {j}];
If[MemberQ[{"{", "}"}, d], AppendTo[c, {d, j}], 7], {j, b}];
d = ToString1[Lie[Sort[Flatten[x], y]]];
Do[d = StringInsert[d, c[[j]][[1]], c[[j]][[2]] + 1], {j, 1, Length[c]}];
Map[ToExpression, ToExpression[d]][[1]]]
In[2431]:= g47 := {{7, 122}, 14, 8, {{{500, {0, 90}, 6}}}, {47, 77, 42}}
In[2432]:= ContinuousSL[g47, #1 > #2 &]
Out[2432]= {{500, 122}, 90, 77, {{{47, {42, 14}, 8}}}, {7, 6, 0}}
In[2433]:= L = {c, 5, 9, {{sv}, {34}, {{agn, {{{500}}}, b, {{{90}}}}}}, a};
In[2434]:= ContinuousSL[L]
Out[2434]= {5, 9, 34, {{90}, {500}, {{a, {{{agn}}}, b, {{{c}}}}}}, sv}
The technique used in the continuous sorting algorithm of
nested lists can be a rather useful in solving other types of work
with nested lists. This is especially true for problems involving
different permutations of elements of a file Flatten[x] with next
restoring the internal structure of the nested x list. At the same
time, it should be borne in mind that such technique implies the
208
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
standartization of list elements along the length of their elements
having a maximum length. As that is done in the ContinuousSL
procedure by means of use the Lie procedure.
In a number of problems of processing of simple x lists on
which the call SimpleListQ[x] returns True, the next procedure
is of a certain interest. The procedure call ClusterList[x] returns
the nested list of ListList type whose 2–element sublists by the
first element determine element of the simple nonempty x list
whereas by the second element define its sequential number in
a cluster of identical elements to which this element belongs. In
the following fragment source code of the ClusterList procedure
with typical examples of its application are represented.
In[2273]:= ClusterList[x_ /; x != {} && SimpleListQ[x]] :=
Module[{a = {}, b = {}, c = Join[x, {x[[–1]]}], d = Map[{#, 1} &,
DeleteDuplicates[x]], n},
Do[n = d[[Flatten[Position[d, Flatten[Select[d, #[[1]] ==
c[[j]] &]]]][[1]]]][[2]]++;
Flatten[Select[d, #[[1]] == c[[j]] &]][[2]];
If[c[[j]] === c[[j + 1]], AppendTo[a, {c[[j]], n}], AppendTo[b, a];
AppendTo[b, {c[[j]], n}]; a = {}], {j, 1, Length[c] – 1}];
AppendTo[b, a]; b = ToString1[Select[b, # != {} &]];
b = If[SuffPref[b, "{{{", 1], b, "{" <> b];
b = ToExpression[StringReplace[b, {"{{" –> "{", "}}" –> "}"}]]]
In[2274]:= ClusterList[{1, 1, 1, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 4, 1, 1, 1}]
Out[2274]= {{1, 1}, {1, 2}, {1, 3}, {3, 1}, {3, 2}, {3, 3}, {4, 1},
{4, 2}, {5, 1}, {5, 2}, {5, 3}, {4, 3}, {1, 4}, {1, 5}, {1, 6}}
In[2275]:= ClusterList[{1, 1, 1, 3, 3, t + p, 3, 4, 4, 5, a, 5, 5, 4,
1, 1, a, 1, (a + b) + c^c}]
Out[2275]= {{1, 1}, {1, 2}, {1, 3}, {3, 1}, {3, 2}, {p + t, 1}, {3, 3},
{4, 1}, {4, 2}, {5, 1}, {a, 1}, {5, 2}, {5, 3}, {4, 3}, {1, 4}, {1, 5},
{a, 2}, {1, 6}, {a + b + c^c, 1}}
In[2276]:= ClusterList[{6, 6, 6, 6, 6, 6, 6, 6, 6, 6, 6, 6}]
Out[2276]= {{6, 1}, {6, 2}, {6, 3}, {6, 4}, {6, 5}, {6, 6}, {6, 7},
{6, 8}, {6, 9}, {6, 10}, {6, 11}, {6, 12}}
In[2277]:= ClusterList[{1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4}]
Out[2277]= {{1, 1}, {1, 2}, {1, 3}, {2, 1}, {2, 2}, {2, 3}, {3, 1}, {3, 2},
{3, 3}, {4, 1}, {4, 2}, {4, 3}}
209
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
In order to simplify of algorithm of a number of tools that
are oriented on solving of processing of the contents of the user
packages, in particular, the SubListsMin procedure can be a
rather useful used, and also for lists processing as a whole. The
call SubListsMin[L, x, y, t] returns the sublists of a list L which
are limited by {x, y} elements and have the minimum length; at
t = "r" selection is executed from left to right, and at t = "l" from
right to left. While the procedure call SubListsMin[L, x, y, t, z]
with optional fifth z argument – an arbitrary expression – returns
sublists without the limiting {x, y} elements. The next fragment
presents source code of the procedure and examples of its use.
In[1242]:= SubListsMin[L_ /; ListQ[L], x_, y_,
t_ /; MemberQ[{"r", "l"}, t], z___] :=
Module[{a, b, c, d = {}, k = 1, j},
{a, b} = Map[Flatten, Map3[Position, L, {x, y}]];
If[a == {} || b == {} || a == {} && b == {} || L == {}, {},
b = Select[Map[If[If[t == "r", Greater, Less][#, a[[1]]], #] &, b],
! SameQ[#, Null] &];
For[k, k <= Length[a], k++, j = 1; While[j <= Length[b],
If[If[t == "r", Greater, Less][b[[j]], a[[k]]], AppendTo[d,
If[t == "r", a[[k]] ;; b[[j]], b[[j]] ;; a[[k]]]]; Break[]]; j++]];
d = Sort[d, Part[#1, 2] – Part[#1, 1] <= Part[#2, 2] – Part[#2, 1] &];
d = Select[d, Part[#, 2] – Part[#, 1] == Part[d[[1]], 2] – Part[d[[1]], 1] &];
d = Map[L[[#]] &, d]; d = If[{z} != {}, Map[#[[2 ;; –2]] &, d], d];
If[Length[d] == 1, Flatten[d], d]]]
In[1243]:= SubListsMin[{a, b, a, c, d, q, v, d, w, j, k, d, h, f, d, h},
a, h, "r", 90]
Out[1243]= {c, d, q, v, d, w, j, k, d}
A useful addition to built-in functions Replace, ReplaceList
and our tools ReplaceList1, ReplaceList2, ReplaceListCond, is a
procedure whose call RepInsList[I, x, y, z, n, r] returns the result
as follows, namely:
At I = "Ins" the result is inserting of an argument z (may be
a list or nested list) before (r = "l") or after (r = "r") of occurrences
of a sub–list y into a list x; whereas at argument I = "Rep" the
result is replacement in a list x of occurrences of a sub–list y on
argument z (may be a list or nested list); at that, if n is an integer,
210
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
then n first replacements in the x are done, if n is Infinity, then
replacements in the list x of all occurrences of a sub–list y onto
argument z are done; at last, if n – an integer list then it defines
sequentional numbers of the occurrences of y in the list x that
are exposed to the above replacements. What is said about the
argument n also fully applies to the call mode at I = "Rep". The
procedure call on unacceptable arguments returns $Failed with
appropriate diagnostic messages or is returned unevaluated. The
following fragment represents the source code of the RepInsList
procedure with examples of its typical application.
In[25]:= RepInsList[I_ /; MemberQ[{"Rep", "Ins"}, I],
x_ /; ListQ[x], y_ /; ListQ[y], z_, n_, r___] :=
Module[{a, b, c, d, t},
{a, b, c} = Map[StringTake[ToString1[#], {2, –2}] &,
{x, y, If[ListQ[z], z, {z}]}];
If[I == "Ins", If[{r} != {}, If[r === "l", c = c <> "," <> b,
If[r === "r", c = b <> "," <> c, Return[Print["Sixth optional
argument should be \"r\" or \"l\""]; $Failed]]]];
If[IntegerQ[n] || n === Infinity, t = StringReplace[a, b –> c, n],
If[PosIntListQ[n] === True, t = StringSplit2[a, b]; d = Length[t];
t = StringJoin[Map[If[MemberQ[n, #],
StringReplace[t[[#]], b –> c], t[[#]]] &, Range[1, d]]],
Return[Print["Fourth argument n should be an integer, integer
list or Infinity"]; $Failed]]],
If[IntegerQ[n] || n === Infinity, t = StringReplace[a, b –> c, n],
If[PosIntListQ[n] === True, t = StringSplit2[a, b]; d = Length[t];
t = StringJoin[Map[If[MemberQ[n, #],
StringReplace[t[[#]], b –> c], t[[#]]] &, Range[1, d]]],
Return[Print["Fourth argument n should be an integer, integer
list or Infinity"]; $Failed]]]]; ToExpression["{" <> t <> "}"]]
In[22]:= x:= {a, b, c, 1, 2, a, b, c, 3, a, b, c, 4, 5, 6, a, b, c, h, a, b, c, g};
y:= {a, b, c}; z:= {m, n, p};
In[27]:= RepInsList["Rep", x, y, z, {1, 3}]
Out[27]= {m, n, p, 1, 2, a, b, c, 3, m, n, p, 4, 5, 6, a, b, c, h, a, b, c, g}
In[28]:= RepInsList["Rep", {aa, bb, aa, cc}, {aa}, {{m, n}}, {2}]
Out[28]= {aa, bb, {m, n}, cc}
In[30]:= RepInsList["Rep", x, y, G + S, 3]
Out[30]= {G + S, 1, 2, G + S, 3, G + S, 4, 5, 6, a, b, c, h, a, b, c, g}
211
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
In[31]:= RepInsList["Ins", {aa, bb, aa, cc, aa}, {aa}, gsv, {1, 2}, "r"]
Out[31]= {aa, gsv, bb, aa, cc, aa, gsv}
In[31]:= RepInsList["Ins", {aa, bb, aa, cc, aa}, {aa}, H, Infinity, "l"]
Out[31]= {H, aa, bb, H, aa, cc, H, aa}
A useful addition to built-in functions Split, SplitBy along
with our tools Split1, Split2, SplitIntegerList, SplitList, SplitList1 is
a procedure (based on the above RepInsList procedure) whose call
Split2[x, y, n] returns the result of splitting of a list x by sub-lists
y; in addition, if n is an integer then n first splittings of the x are
done, if n is Infinity then splittings of the list x by all occurrences
of a sub-list y are done; at last, if n - an integer list then it defines
sequention numbers of the occurrences of y in the list x by which
the list x is exposed by the above splittings. The Split2 handles
the main errors with printing of diagnostic messages. Fragment
represents source code of the procedure and examples of it use.
In[90]:= Split2[x_ /; ListQ[x], y_ /; ListQ[y], n_] :=
Module[{a = ToString[Unique[g]], b, c},
b = RepInsList["Rep", x, y, a, n];
If[b === x, "Second argument is invalid",
b = "{" <> ToString[b] <> "}";
c = StringReplace[b, {"{" <> a <> "," –> "{", ", " <> a <> "," –> "},{",
", " <> a <> "}" –> "}"}]; ToExpression[c]]]
In[91]:= Split2[{a, b, c, v, g, a, b, c, h, a, b, g, j, a, b}, {a, b}, Infinity]
Out[91]= {{c, v, g}, {c, h}, {g, j}}
In[92]:= Split2[{a, b, c, v, g, a, b, c, h, a, b, g, j, a, b}, {a, b}, {1, 3}]
Out[92]= {{c, v, g, a, b, c, h}, {g, j, a, b}}
While the call StringReplace6[x, y –> z, n] returns the result
of replacing in a list x of substrings y onto string z; at that, if n
is an integer then n first replacements are done, if n is Infinity
then replacements at all occurrences of a substring y are done;
at last, if n – an integer list then it defines sequention numbers
of the occurrences of y for which the replacements are done. In
next fragment the source code of the procedure and an example
of its typical application are represented.
In[95]:= StringReplace6[x_ /; StringQ[x], y_ /; RuleQ[y], n_] :=
Module[{a = StringSplit2[x, y[[1]]], b, c},
If[a === x, "Second argument is invalid", b = Length[a]];
If[IntegerQ[n] || n === Infinity, StringReplace[x, y, n],
212
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
StringJoin[Map[If[MemberQ[n, #], StringReplace[a[[#]],
y[[1]] –> y[[2]]], a[[#]]] &, Range[1, b]]]]]
In[96]:= StringReplace6["aabbccaahgaaffaa", "aa" –> "12", {2, 4}]
Out[96]= "aabbcc12hgaaff12"
At last, the following simple enough procedures MapList ÷
MapList2 are a some kind of generalization of the built-in Map
function to the lists of an arbitrary structure. The procedure call
MapList[f, x] returns the result of applying of a symbol, block,
function, module or pure function f (except f symbol all remaining
admissible objects shall have arity 1) to each element of a list x with
maintaining its internal structure. It is supposed that sub-lists of
the list x have the unary nesting levels, otherwise the procedure
call is returned unevaluated. The following fragment represents
source code of the procedure and an example of its application.
In[7]:= MapList[f_ /; SymbolQ[f] || BlockFuncModQ[f] ||
PureFuncQ[f], x_ /; ListQ[x] &&
And1[Map[Length[DeleteDuplicates[LevelsOfList[#]]] == 1 &, x]]] :=
Module[{g}, SetAttributes[g, Listable]; g[t_] := (f) @@ {t}; Map[g, x]]
In[8]:= F[g_] := g^3; MapList[F, {{a, b, c}, {{m, n}}, {}, {{{h, p}}}}]
Out[8]= {{a^3, b^3, c^3}, {{m^3, n^3}}, {}, {{{h^3, p^3}}}}
MapList1 and MapList2 are useful versions of the above tool [8].
In a number of nested lists processing tasks, it is of interest
to distribute the same elements to the nesting levels of arbitrary
list. The following AllonLevels procedure solves the problem in
a certain sense. Calling AllonLevels[w] procedure returns the
nested list of the following format
{{a, na1, ..., nap}, {b, nb1, ..., nbp}, …, {z, nz1, ..., nzp}}
where elements {a, b, c, ..., z} represent all elements of a list w
without their duplication whereas elements {nj1, ..., njp} submit
nesting level numbers of the w list on which the corresponding
elements j∈
∈{a, b, c, ..., z} are located. The following fragment
represents the source code of the AllonLevels procedure along
with typical examples of its application.
In[77]:= AllonLevels[x_ /; ListQ[x]] := Module[{a = {}, c = 1,
b = MaxLevel1[x]},
213
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
While[c <= b, AppendTo[a, Map[{"_" <> ToString[c], #} &,
Level[x, {c}]]]; c++];
a = Map[If[IntegerQ[ToExpression[StringTake[#[[1]],
{2, –1}]]] && ! ListQ[#[[2]]], #, Nothing] &, Flatten[a, 1]];
a = Map[Flatten, Map[Reverse, a]];
a = Gather[a, #1[[1]] == #2[[1]] &];
a = Map[DeleteDuplicates, Map[Flatten, a]];
a = Map[If[Length[#] == 2,
{#[[1]], ToExpression[StringTake[#[[2]], {2, –1}]]},
Join[{#[[1]]}, Map[ToExpression[StringTake[#, {2, –1}]] &,
#[[2 ;; –1]]]]] &, a]]
In[78]:= X:= {a, b, m, c, b, {m, b, n, a, p}, {{x, y, a, n, b, c, z}}}
In[79]:= AllonLevels[X]
Out[79]= {{a, 1, 2, 3}, {b, 1, 2, 3}, {m, 1, 2}, {c, 1, 3}, {n, 2, 3},
{p, 2}, {x, 3}, {y, 3}, {z, 3}}
In[80]:= AllonLevels[{a, b, c, d, f, g, h, s, d, r, t, u, u}]
Out[80]= {{a, 1}, {b, 1}, {c, 1}, {d, 1}, {f, 1}, {g, 1}, {h, 1}, {s, 1},
{r, 1}, {t, 1}, {u, 1}}
The procedure rather successfully is used at problems solving
related to the nested lists processing.
While unlike the previous procedure the CountOnLevelList
procedure defines distributes the number of occurrences of list
elements to the nesting levels based on their multiplicity. The
procedure call CountOnLevelList[x] returns the nested list which
consists of 3-element sublists whose the 1st element - an element
of the list x, the 2nd – a nesting level contained it and the third –
number of occurrences of the element on this nesting level.
In[2225]:= CountOnLevelList[x_ /; ListQ[x]] := Module[{c = {},
j = 1, a = DeleteDuplicates[Flatten[x]], b = MaxLevel1[x]},
While[j <= Length[a], AppendTo[c, Map[{a[[j]], #,
Count[x, a[[j]], {#}]} &, Range[1, b]]]; j++];
Map[Partition[#, 3] &, Map[Flatten, c]]]
In[2226]:= X := {a, b, m, c, b, {m, b, n, a, p}, {{x, y, b, n, b, c, z}}}
In[2227]:= CountOnLevelList[X]
Out[2227]= {{{a, 1, 1}, {a, 2, 1}, {a, 3, 0}}, {{b, 1, 2}, {b, 2, 1}, {b, 3, 2}},
{{m, 1, 1}, {m, 2, 1}, {m, 3, 0}}, {{c, 1, 1}, {c, 2, 0}, {c, 3, 1}}, {{n, 1, 0}, {n, 2, 1},
214
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
{n, 3, 1}}, {{p, 1, 0}, {p, 2, 1}, {p, 3, 0}}, {{x, 1, 0}, {x, 2, 0}, {x, 3, 1}}, {{y, 1, 0},
{y, 2, 0}, {y, 3, 1}}, {{z, 1, 0}, {z, 2, 0}, {z, 3, 1}}}
In some cases, special cases occur when sorting lists, one of
which the following procedure presents. So, the procedure call
SSort[x, p, t, sf] returns the list – the result of a special sorting of
a list x according to a sorting function sf (optional argument; in its
absence the default function Order is used), when the resulting list
at t=0 starts with sorted p list elements belonging to x and at t=1
ends with p elements. If elements p are not in the x list, then the
Sort[x, sf] list is returned.
In[2221]:= SSort[x_ /; ListQ[x], p_ /; ListQ[p],
t_ /; ! FreeQ[{0, 1}, t], sf___] := Module[{a = Sort[x, sf], b, c},
b = Intersection[x, c = Sort[Select[x, ! FreeQ[p, #] &], sf]];
If[b == {}, a, If[t == 0, Join[c, Complement[x, b]],
Join[Complement[x, b], c]]]]
In[2222]:= SSort[{s, f, h, d, a, m, k, h, m, p, t, y, m},
{m, s, h}, 0]
Out[2222]= {h, h, m, m, m, s, a, d, f, k, p, t, y}
In[2223]:= SSort[{s, f, h, d, a, m, k, h, m, p, t, y, m},
{m, p, t}, 1]
Out[2223]= {a, d, f, h, k, s, y, m, m, m, p, t}
A lot of the additional tools expanding the Mathematica, in
particular, for effective programming of a number of problems
of manipulation with the list structures of various organization
are presented a quite in details in [1-16]. Being additional tools
for work with lists – basic structures in Mathematica – they are
rather useful in a number of applications of various purpose. A
number of means were already considered, while others will be
considered along with means which are directly not associated
with lists, but quite accepted for work with separate formats of
lists. Many means represented here and in [1-16], arose in the
process of programming a lot of applications as tools wearing a
rather mass character. Some of them use techniques which are
rather useful in the practical programming in Mathematica. In
particular, the above relates to a computer study of the Cellular
Automata (CA; Homogeneous Structures – HS).
215
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
3.7. Attributes of procedures and functions
In addition to definition of procedures (blocks, modules) and
functions, the Mathematica system allows you to define general
properties that are inherent in them. The system provides a set
of attributes that can be used to specify different properties of
procedures and functions irrespectively their definitions. At the
same time, attributes can be assigned not only to functions and
procedures, but also to symbols.
Attributes[G] – returns the attributes ascribed to a G symbol;
Attributes[G] = {a1, a2,…} – the function call sets the attributes
a1, a2,… for a G symbol;
Attributes[G] = {} – the function call sets G to have no attributes;
SetAttributes[G, atr] – the function call adds the atr attribute to
the attributes of a G symbol;
ClearAttributes[G, attr] – the function call removes a attr from
the attributes of a G symbol.
Here are the most used attributes with their descriptions:
Orderless – attribute defines orderless, commutative tools (their
formal arguments are sorted into standard order);
Flat – attribute defines flat, associative tools (their arguments are
"flattened out");
Listable – this attribute defines automatical element-by-element
application of a symbol over lists that appear as arguments;
Constant – this attribute defines that all derivatives of a symbol
are zero;
NumericFunction – the attribute defines that a tool is assumed
to have a numerical value when its arguments are numeric quantities;
Protected – this attribute defines that values of a symbol cannot
be changed;
Locked – this attribute defines that attributes of a symbol cannot
be changed;
ReadProtected – attribute defines that values of a symbol cannot
be read;
Temporary – the attribute defines that a symbol is local variable,
removed when no longer used;
216
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
Stub – this attribute defines that a symbol needs is automatically
called if it is ever explicitly input.
The remaining admissible attributes can be found in detail
in [2-6,9,10,15], here some useful examples of the application of
the attributes presented above are given. For example, we can
use the attribute Flat to specify that a function is "flat", so that
nested invocations are automatically flattened, and it behaves as
if it were associative:
In[2222]:= SetAttributes[F, Flat]
In[2223]:= F[F[x, y, z], F[p, F[m, n], t]]
Out[2223]= F[x, y, z, p, m, n, t]
The Listable attribute is of particular interest at operating
with list structures, its use well illustrates the following rather
simple example:
In[2224]:= Attributes[ToString]
Out[2224]= {Protected}
In[2225]:= L = {a, b, {c, d}, {{m, p, n}}};
In[2226]:= ToString[L]
Out[2226]= "{a, b, {c, d}, {{m, p, n}}}"
In[2227]:= SetAttributes[ToString, Listable]
In[2228]:= ToString[L]
Out[2228]= {"a", "b", {"c", "d"}, {{"m", "p", "n"}}}
In this regard, a procedure whose call ListableS[F, x] returns
the result of in one step, element–by–element application of a F
symbol to a list x that acts as the second argument (wherein, after
the procedure call, the attributes of the F symbol remain the same as
before the procedure call):
In[2229]:= ListableS[F_Symbol, x_] := Module[{s, t,
g = Attributes[F]}, If[MemberQ[g, Listable], s = F[x]; t = 1,
SetAttributes[F, Listable]; s = F[x]];
If[t === 1, s, ClearAttributes[F, Listable]; s]]
In[2230]:= ListableS[ToString, L]
Out[2230]= {"a", "b", {"c", "d"}, {{"m", "p", "n"}}}
The ListableS procedure can be represented by equivalent
function ListableS1 of the list format as follows:
217
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
In[2231]:= ListableS1[F_Symbol, x_] := {Save["#", {g, s, t}],
g = Attributes[F], If[MemberQ[g, Listable], s = F[x]; t = 1,
SetAttributes[F, Listable]; s = F[x]]; If[t === 1, s,
ClearAttributes[F, Listable]; s], Get["#"], DeleteFile["#"]}[[3]]
In[2232]:= {g, s, t} = {42, 47, 67}; ListableS1[F, L]
Out[2232]= {F[a], F[b], {F[c], F[d]}, {{F[m], F[p], F[n]}}}
In[2233]:= {g, s, t}
Out[2233]= {42, 47, 67}
The Temporary attribute determines that a symbol has local
character, removed when no longer used. For instance, the local
procedure variables have the Temporary attribute.
In[90]:= A[x__] := Module[{a = 77}, {a*x, Attributes[a]}]
In[91]:= A[5]
Out[91]= {385, {Temporary}}
In[92]:= A1[x_] := Module[{a = 7}, a = {a*x, Attributes[a], a};
ClearAttributes[a, Temporary]; a]
In[93]:= A1[5]
Out[93]= {35, {Temporary}, 7}
By managing the Temporary attribute, it is possible make
the values of the local variables of the procedures available in
the current session outside of these procedures, as the previous
example illustrates. At that, you can both save the Temporary
attribute for them or selectively cancel it.
The ReadProtected attribute prevents expression associated
with a W symbol from being seen. In addition, this expression
cannot be obtained not only by the function call Definition[W],
but also be written to a file, for example, by the function Save,
for example:
In[2129]:= G[x_, y_, z_] := x^2 + y^2 + z^2;
In[2130]:= SetAttributes[G, ReadProtected]
In[2131]:= Definition[G]
Out[2131]= Attributes[G] = {ReadProtected}
In[2132]:= Save["###", G]
In[2133]:= Read["###"]
Out[2133]= {ReadProtected}
218
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
This attribute is typically used to hide the values of certain
program objects, especially procedure and function definitions.
While this attribute is cancelled by means of the ClearAttributes
function, for example:
In[2141]:= ClearAttributes[G, ReadProtected]
In[2142]:= Definition[G]
Out[2142]= G[x_, y_, z_] := x^2 + y^2 + z^2
The Constant attribute defines all derivatives of a g symbol
to be zero, for example:
In[2555]:= SetAttributes[g, Constant]
In[2556]:= g[x_] := a*x^9 + b*x^10 + c
In[2557]:= Definition[g]
Out[2557]= Attributes[g] = {Constant} + c
g[x_] := a*x^9 + b*x^10
In[2558]:= Map[D[g, {x, #}] &, Range[10]]
Out[2558]= {0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0}
The Locked attribute prohibits attributes change of a symbol:
In[2654]:= ClearAttributes[Vs, {Locked}]
… Attributes: Symbol Vs is locked.
In[2655]:= Attributes[Vs]
Out[2655]= {Listable, Locked}
In[2656]:= Clear[Vs]; Attributes[Vs]
Out[2656]= {Listable, Locked}
In[2657]:= ClearAll[Vs]; Attributes[Vs]
… ClearAll: Symbol Vs is locked.
Out[2657]= {Listable, Locked}
In[2658]:= ClearAll[Gs]
…ClearAll: Symbol Gs is Protected.
In[2659]:= Attributes[Gs]
Out[2659]= {Protected}
Note, that unlike the declaration by the Mathematica the
function ClearAll to override a symbol attributes, this method
does not work if the symbol has {Protected, Locked} attributes,
as illustrated by the fragment above. The Mathematica claims,
the call ClearAll[g1, g2,…] clears all values, definitions, defaults,
219
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
attributes, messages, associated with {g1, g2,…} symbols whereas
in reality it is not quite so. In addition, the Remove function also
does not affect symbols with the {Protected, Locked} attributes.
On the other hand, a symbol x with attributes {Protected, Locked}
is saved in a w file by means of the functions call Save[w, x] and
Write[w, Definition[x]] with saving of all attributes ascribed to
the x symbol. At the same time, attributes assigned to a symbol
x are relevant only within the current session, being lost in the
new session. Calling Unlocked[f] deletes the current document
nb by returning the updated nb document (by replacing the Locked
attribute with the Stub attribute) and saving it to a nb–file f.
In[2759]:= Unlocked[fnb_] := Module[{a = NotebookGet[]},
a = ReplaceAll[a, "Locked" –> "Stub"];
NotebookClose[]; NotebookSave[a, fnb]]
In[2760]:= Unlocked["C:\\Temp\\Exp.nb"]
The NumericFunction attribute of a procedure or function F
indicates that F[x1, x2, x3, …] should be considered a numerical
quantity whenever all its arguments are numerical quantities:
In[2858]:= Attributes[Sin]
Out[2858]= {Listable, NumericFunction, Protected}
The Orderless attribute of a procedure or function indicates
that its arguments are automatically sorted in canonical order.
This property is accounted for in pattern matching.
In[2953]:= SetAttributes[F, Orderless]
In[2954]:= F[n, m, p, 3, t, 7, a]
Out[2954]= F[3, 7, a, m, n, p, t]
In[2955]:= F[z_, y_, x_] := x + y + z
In[2956]:= Definition[F]
Out[2956]= Attributes[F] = {Orderless}
F[x_, y_, z_] := x + y + z
In[2957]:= SetAttributes[g, Orderless]
In[2958]:= L = {n, m, u, 3, t, 7, a, c, u, d, s, j, a, p}; v := g @@ L;
Map[Part[v, #] &, Range[Length[L]]]
Out[2958]= {3, 7, a, a, c, d, j, m, n, p, s, t, u, u}
The last example of the previous fragment illustrates using
of the Orderless attribute to sort lists in lexicographical order.
220
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
3.8. Additional tools expanding the built–in Mathematica
functions, or its software as a whole
The string and list structures are of the most important in
the Mathematica, they both are considered in the previous two
chapters in the context of means, additional to the built-in tools,
without regard to a large number of the standard functions of
processing of structures of this type. Quite naturally, here it isn't
possible to consider all range of standard functions of this type,
sending the interested reader to the reference information on
the Mathematica or to the appropriate numerous publications.
It is possible to find many of these publications on the website
http://www.wolfram.com/books. Having presented the means
expanding the built–in Mathematica software in the context of
processing of string and list structures in the present item we
will represent the means expanding the Mathematica that are
oriented on processing of other types of objects. Above all, we
will present some tools of bit–by–bit processing of symbols.
The Bits procedure significantly uses function BinaryListQ,
providing a number of useful operations during of operating
with symbols. On the tuple of factual arguments <x, p>, where
x – a 1–symbol string (character) and p – an integer in the range
0 .. 8, the call Bits[x, p] returns binary representation of the x in
the form of the list, if p = 0, and p–th bit of such representation
of a symbol x otherwise. While on a tuple of actual arguments
<x, p>, where x – a nonempty binary list of length no more than
8 and p = 0, the procedure call returns a symbol corresponding
to the set binary x list; in other cases the call Bits[x,p] is returned
as unevaluated. The fragment below represents source code of
the procedure Bits along with an example of its application.
In[7]:= Bits[x_, P_ /; IntegerQ[P]] := Module[{a, k},
If[StringQ[x] && StringLength[x] == 1, If[1 <= P <= 8,
PadLeft[IntegerDigits[ToCharacterCode[x][[1]], 2], 8][[P]],
If[P == 0, PadLeft[IntegerDigits[ToCharacterCode[x][[1]], 2], 8],
Defer[Bits[x, P]]]],
If[BinaryListQ[x] && 1 <= Length[Flatten[x]] <= 8, a = Length[x];
FromCharacterCode[Sum[x[[k]]*2^(a – k), {k, a}]], Defer[Bits[x, P]]]]]
221
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
In[8]:= Map9[Bits, {"A", "A", {1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1}, "A", {1, 1, 1, 1, 0, 1}},
{0, 2, 0, 9, 0}]
Out[8]= {{0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1}, 1, "A", Bits["A", 9], "="}
If the previous Bits procedure provides a simple enough
processing of symbols, the two procedures BitSet1 and BitGet1
provide the expanded bit–by–bit information processing like
our Maple procedures [16]. In the Maple we created a number
of procedures (Bit, Bit1, xNB, xbyte1, xbyte) that provide bit–
by–bit information processing [22-28,42]; the Mathematica has
similar means too, in particular, the call BitSet[n, k] returns the
result of setting of 1 to the k-th position of binary representation
of an integer n. The procedure call BitSet1[n,p] returns result of
setting to positions of the binary representation of an integer n
that are determined by the first elements of sub-lists of a nested
p list, {0|1} – values; in addition, in a case of non-nested p list a
value replacement only in a single position of n integer is made.
Procedures BitSet1 and BitGet1 are included in our package [16].
It should be noted that the BitSet1 procedure functionally
expands both the standard function BitSet, and BitClear of the
Mathematica while the procedure BitGet1 functionally extands
the standard functions BitGet and BitLength of the system. The
call BitGet1[n, p] returns the list of bits in the positions of binary
representation of an integer n that are defined by a p list; at the
same time, in a case of an integer p the bit in position p of binary
representation of n integer is returned. While the procedure call
BitGet1[x, n, p] through a symbol x in addition returns number
of bits in the binary representation of an integer n. The above
means rather wide are used at bit–by–bit processing.
In the Mathematica the transformation rules are generally
determined by the Rule function, whose call Rule[a, b] returns
the transformation rule in the form a –> b. These rules are used
in transformations of expressions by the functions ReplaceAll,
Replace, ReplaceRepeated, StringReplace, StringReplaceList,
ReplacePart, StringCases, that use either one rule, or their list
as simple list, and a list of ListList type. For dynamic generation
of such rules the GenRules procedure can be useful, whose call
222
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
GenRules[x, y] depending on a type of its arguments returns a
single rule or list of rules; the procedure call GenRules[x, y, z]
with the third optional z argument – any expression – returns the
list with single transformation rule or the nested list of ListList
type. Depending on the coding format, the call returns result in
the following formats, namely:
(1) GenRules[{x, y, z,…}, a] ⇒ {x –> a, y –> a, z –> a,…}
(2) GenRules[{x, y, z,…}, a, h] ⇒ {{x –> a}, {y –> a}, {z –> a},…}
(3) GenRules[{x, y, z,…}, {a, b, c,…}] ⇒ {x –> a, y –> b, z –> c,…}
(4) GenRules[{x, y, z,…}, {a, b, c,…}, h] ⇒ {{x –> a}, {y –> b}, {z –> c},…}
(5) GenRules[x, {a, b, c,…}] ⇒ {x –> a}
(6) GenRules[x, {a, b, c,…}, h] ⇒ {x –> a}
(7) GenRules[x, a] ⇒ {x –> a}
(8) GenRules[x, a, h] ⇒ {x –> a}
The GenRules procedure is useful, in particular, when in a
procedure or function it is necessary to dynamically generate
the transformation rules depending on conditions. The following
fragment represents source code of the GenRules procedure and
the most typical examples of its application onto all above cases
of coding of the procedure call.
In[7]:= GenRules[x_, y_, z___] := Module[{a, b = Flatten[{x}],
c = Flatten[If[ListQ /@ {x, y} == {True, False},
PadLeft[{}, Length[x], y], {y}]]},
a = Min[Length /@ {b, c}]; b = Map9[Rule, b[[1 ;; a]], c[[1 ;; a]]];
If[{z} == {}, b, b = List /@ b; If[Length[b] == 1, Flatten[b], b]]]
In[8]:= {GenRules[{x, y, z}, {a, b, c}], GenRules[x, {a, b, c}],
GenRules[{x, y}, {a, b, c}], GenRules[x, a], GenRules[{x, y}, a]}
Out[8]= {{x → a, y → b, z → c}, {x → a}, {x → a, y → b}, {x → a},
{x → a, y → a}}
In[9]:= {GenRules[{x, y, z}, {a, b, c}, 7], GenRules[x, {a, b, c}, 42],
GenRules[x, a, 6], GenRules[{x, y}, {a,b,c}, 7], GenRules[{x, y}, a, 72]}
Out[9]= {{{x → a}, {y → b}, {z → c}}, {x → a}, {x → a},
{{x → a}, {y → b}}, {{x → a}, {y → a}}}
Modifications GenRules1÷GenRules3 of the above procedure
are quite useful in many applications [1-15]. A number of tools
of the MathToolBox package essentially use means of so–called
GenRules–group [16].
223
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
Considering the importance of the map function, starting
with Maple 10, the option `inplace`, admissible only at use of the
map function with rectangular rtable–objects at renewing these
objects in situ was defined. While for objects of other type this
mechanism isn't supported as certain examples from [18,21–42]
illustrate. For the purpose of disposal of this shortcoming was
offered a quite simple MapInSitu procedure [42]. Along with it
the similar tools for Mathematica in the form of two functions
MapInSitu, MapInSitu1 and the MapInSitu2 procedure have
been offered. With mechanisms used by the Maple procedure
MapInSitu and Math–tools MapInSitu÷MapInSitu2 the reader
can familiarize in [6-16,27,42]. Tools of the MapInSitu-group for
both systems are characterized by the prerequisite, the second
argument at their call points out on an identifier in the string
format to which a certain value has been ascribed earlier and
that is updated "in situ" after its processing by the {map|Map}
tool. Anyway, the calls of the tools return Map[x,y] as a result.
The following procedure makes grouping of expressions
that are set by x argument according to their types defined by
the Head2 procedure; in addition, a separate expression or their
list is coded as a x argument. The procedure call GroupNames[x]
returns simple list or nested list whose elements are lists whose
first element – an object type according to the Head2 procedure,
whereas the others – expressions of this type. The next fragment
represents source code of the GroupNames procedure with an
example of its typical application.
In[7]:= GroupNames[x_] := Module[{a = If[ListQ[x], x, {x}], c, d,
p, t, b = {{"Null", "Null"}}, k = 1},
For[k, k <= Length[a], k++, c = a[[k]]; d = Head2[c];
t = Flatten[Select[b, #[[1]] === d &]];
If[t == {} && (d === Symbol && Attributes[c] === {Temporary}),
AppendTo[b, {Temporary, c}],
If[t == {}, AppendTo[b, {d, c}], p = Flatten[Position[b, t]][[1]];
AppendTo[b[[p]], c]]]]; b = b[[2 ;; -1]];
b = Gather[b, #1[[1]] == #2[[1]] &];
b = Map[DeleteDuplicates[Flatten[#]] &, b];
If[Length[b] == 1, Flatten[b], b]]
224
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
In[8]:= GroupNames[{Sin, Cos, ProcQ, Locals2, 90, Map1, StrStr,
72/77, Avz, Nvalue1, a + b, Avz, 77, Agn, If, Vsv}]
Out[8]= {{"System", Sin, Cos, If}, {"Module", ProcQ, Locals2,
Nvalue1, Agn}, {Integer, 90, 77}, {"Function", Map1, StrStr},
{Rational, 72/77}, {Temporary, Avz, Vsv}, {Plus, a + b}}
The procedure call RemoveNames[] without any arguments
provides removal from the current Mathematica session of the
names, whose types are other than procedures and functions,
and whose definitions have been evaluated in the current session;
moreover, the names are removed so that aren't recognized by
the Mathematica any more. The procedure call RemoveNames[]
along with removal of the above names from the current session
returns the nested 2-element list whose first element defines the
list of names of procedures, while the second element – the list
of names of functions whose definitions have been evaluated in
the current session. The following fragment represents source
code of the RemoveNames procedure and an example of its use.
In[7]:= RemoveNames[x___] := Module[{a = Select[Names["`*"],
ToString[Definition[#]] != "Null" &], b},
ToExpression["Remove[" <> StringTake[ToString[MinusList[a,
Select[a, ProcQ[#] || ! SameQ[ToString[Quiet[DefFunc[#]]],
"Null"]||Quiet[Check[QFunction[#], False]] &]]], {2, -2}] <> "]"];
b = Select[a, ProcQ[#] &]; {b, MinusList[a, b]}]
In[8]:= RemoveNames[]
Out[8]= {{"Art", "Kr", "Rans"}, {"Ian"}}
The above procedure is an useful tool in some appendices
connected with cleaning of the working Mathematica field from
definitions of the non–used symbols. The procedure confirmed
a certain efficiency in management of random access memory.
In the context of use of the built-in functions Nest and Map
for definition of new pure functions on a basis of the available
ones, we can offer the procedure as an useful generalization of
the built-in Map function, whose call Mapp[F, E, x] returns the
result of application of a function/procedure F to an expression
E with transfer to it of the factual arguments defined by a tuple
of x expressions which can be empty. In a case of the empty x
225
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
tuple the identity Map[F, E] ≡ Mapp[F, E] takes place. As formal
arguments of the built-in function Map[w, g] act the f name of a
procedure/function while as the second argument – an arbitrary
g expression, to whose operands of the 1st level the w is applied.
The following fragment represents the source code of the Mapp
procedure and a typical example of its application.
In[308]:= Mapp[f_ /; ProcQ[f] || SysFuncQ[f] ||
SymbolQ[f], Ex_, x___] :=
Module[{a = Level[Ex, 1], b = {x}, c = {}, h, g = Head[Ex], k = 1},
If[b == {}, Map[f, Ex], h = Length[a]; For[k, k <= h, k++,
AppendTo[c, ToString[f] <> "[" <> ToString1[a[[k]]] <> ", " <>
ListStrToStr[Map[ToString1, {x}]] <> "]"]];
g @@ Map[ToExpression, c]]]
In[309]:= Mapp[F, {a, b, c}, x, y, z]
Out[309]= {F[a, "F", y, z], F[b, "F", y, z], F[c, "F", y, z]}
In[310]:= Mapp[ProcQ, {Sin, ProcQ, Mapp, Definition2, StrStr}]
Out[310]= {False, True, True, True, False}
Note that algorithm of the Mapp procedure is based on the
following relation, namely:
Map[F, Exp] ≡ Head[Exp][Sequences[Map[F, Level[Exp, 1]]]]
whose rightness follows from definition of the standard Level,
Map, Head functions and our Sequences procedure considered
in [6,8-16]. The relation can be used and at realization of cyclic
structures for the solution of problems of other directionality,
including programming on a basis of use of mechanism of the
pure functions. While the Mapp procedure in the definite cases
rather significantly simplifies programming of various tasks.
The Listable attribute for a function f determines that it will be
automatically applied to elements of the list which acts as its
argument. Such approach can be used rather successfully in a
number of cases of programming of blocks, functions, modules.
In this context a rather simple Mapp1 procedure is of interest,
whose call Mapp1[x,y] unlike the call Map[x,y] returns the result
of applying of a block, function or module x to all elements of y
list, regardless of their location on list levels. Meanwhile, for a
number of functions and expressions the Listable attribute does
226
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
not work, and in this case the system provides special functions
Map and Thread that in a certain relation can quite be referred
to the structural means that provide application of functions to
parts of expressions. In this regard we programmed a group of
a rather simple and at the same time useful enough procedures
and functions, so-called Map–group which rather significantly
expand the built–in Map function. The Map–group consists of
24 tools Map1÷Map24 different complexity levels. These tools
are considered in detail in [5-14], they included in our package
MathToolBox [16]. The above means from Map–group rather
significantly expand functionality of the built–in Map function.
In a number of cases the means allow to simplify programming
of procedures and functions.
An useful enough modification of standard Map function is
the MapEx function whose call returns the list of application of
symbol f to those elements of a list that satisfy a testing function
w (block, function, pure function, or module from one argument) or
whose positions are defined by the list of positive integers w.
The built-in function call MapAll[f, exp] applies f symbol to all
subexpressions of an exp expression which are on all its levels.
Whereas the procedure call MapToExpr[f, y] returns the result
of application of a symbol f or their list only to all symbols of y
expression. Furthermore, from the list f are excluded symbols
entering into the y expression. For example, in a case if f = {G, S}
then applying of f to a symbol w gives G[S[w]]. At absence of
acceptable f symbols the call returns the initial y expression. The
call MapToExpr[f,y,z] with the 3rd optional z argument – a symbol
or their list – allows to exclude the z symbols from applying to
them f symbols. In certain cases the procedure is a rather useful
means at expressions processing.
The procedure MapListAll substantially adjoins the above
Map–group. The call MapAt[F, expr, n] of the standard MapAt
function provides applying F to the elements of an expression
expr at its positions n. While the procedure call MapListAll[F, j]
returns the result of applying F to all elements of a list j. At that,
a simple analog of the above procedure, basing on mechanism
227
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
of temporary change of attributes for factual F argument in the
call MapListAll1[F,j] solves the problem similarly to MapListAll
procedure. On the list j of a kind {{…{{…}}…}} both procedures
returns {{…{{F[]}}…}}. The following useful procedure MapExpr
also adjoins the above Map–group.
Calling the MapExpr[x, y] procedure returns the result of
applying a symbol x to each variable of an expression y, while
calling the MapExpr[x, y, z] through optional argument z – an
undefined symbol – additionally returns the list of all variables
of the y expression in the string format. The following fragment
represents the source code of the MapExpr procedure along with
examples of its typical application.
In[1942]:= MapExpr[x_ /; SymbolQ[x], y_, z___] :=
Module[{a, b, c, d, p, g},
If[SameQ[Head[y], Symbol], ToExpression[ToString[x @@ {y}]],
a = ToString[MathMLForm[y]];
b = StringSplit[a, "\n" –> ""]; g = ToString[x];
b = Map[If[# == "", Nothing, StringTrim[#]] &, b];
c = Map[If[! StringFreeQ[#, "<mi>"] &&
! StringFreeQ[#, "</mi>"],
StringReplace[#, {"<mi>" –> "", "</mi>" –> ""}], Nothing] &, b];
c = Sort[Map[If[Quiet[SystemQ[Name1[#]]], Nothing, #] &, c]];
If[{z} != {} && ! HowAct[z], z = DeleteDuplicates[c], 77];
p = Flatten[Map[{"[" <> # <> "," –> "[" <> g <> "[" <> # <> "],",
" " <> # <> "]" –> " " <> g <> "[" <> # <> "]]",
" " <> # <> "," –> " " <> g <> "[" <> # <> "],",
"," <> # <> " " –> ", " <> g <> "[" <> # <> "] ",
"[" <> # <> "]" –> "[" <> g <> "[" <> # <> "]]"} &, c]];
ToExpression[StringReplace[ToString[FullForm[y]], p]]]]
In[1943]:= exp = (a*y/(m + n) + b^z)/(cg – d*Log[h])*Sin[d + bc];
In[1944]:= MapExpr["F", exp, avz]
Out[1944]= ((F[b]^F[z] + (F[a]*F[y])/(F[m] + F[n]))*
Sin[F[bc] + F[d]])/(F[cg] – F[d]*Log[F[h]])
In[1945]:= avz
Out[1945]= {"a", "b", "bc", "cg", "d", "h", "m", "n", "y", "z"}
In[1946]:= MapExpr[F, {a, b, {m, n, p}, g, s, Sin[y], c}, vsv]
Out[1946]= {F[a], F[b], {F[m], F[n], F[p]}, F[g], F[s], Sin[F[y]], F[c]}
228
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
In[1947]:= vsv
Out[1947]= {"a", "b", "c", "g", "m", "n", "p", "s", "y"}
In[1948]:= MapExpr[F, {a/b + c/d, n, {{h}}, Sin[p]}, avz]
Out[1948]= {F[a]/F[b] + F[c]/F[d], F[n], {{F[h]}}, Sin[F[p]]}
In[1949]:= avz
Out[1949]= {"a", "b", "c", "d", "h", "n", "p"}
In the context of structural analysis of the expressions, the
VarsExpr procedure whose call VarsExpr[x] returns the five–
element list, the 1st element of which defines the list of standard
tool names in the string format, the 2nd element defines the list of
the user tools names in the string format, the 3rd element defines
the list of the built–in operators in the string format, the fourth
element defines the list of the variables in the string format, at
last the firth element defines the list of the arithmetic operations
in the string format which compose an expression x is a rather
useful tool. The following fragment represents the source code
of the VarsExpr procedure with an example of its typical use.
In[21]:= VarsExpr[x_] := Module[{a, b, d = {}, d1 = {}, d2 = {},
d3 = {}, d4 = {}, f},
a = PressStr[StringReplace[ToString[MathMLForm[x]], "\n" –> ""]];
b = Map[SubsString[a, #, 7] &,
{{"<mi>", "</mi>"}, {"<mo>", "</mo>"}}];
If[! StringFreeQ[a, "</msqrt>"], AppendTo[b, "sqrt"], 7];
b = Sort[DeleteDuplicates[Flatten[b]]];
Map[If[Quiet[SystemQ[Name1[#]]], AppendTo[d, Name1[#]],
If[Quiet[BlockFuncModQ[Name1[#]]], AppendTo[d1, #],
If[PrefixQ["&#", #], AppendTo[d2, FromCharacterCode[
ToExpression[StringTrim[SubsString[#, {"&#", ";"}, 7][[1]]]]]],
If[SymbolQ[#], AppendTo[d3, #], AppendTo[d4, #]]]]] &, b];
Map[Select[#, ! NullStrQ[#] &] &, {d, d1, d2, d3, d4}]]
In[22]:= VarsExpr[(f[1/b] –> Cos[a + Sqrt[c + d]])/(Tan[1/b] <–> 1/c^2)];
Out[22]= {{"Cos", "Sqrt", "Tan"}, {"f"}, {"<–>", "–>"},
{"a", "b", "c", "d"}, {"(", ")", "+"}}}
Meantime, one point should be highlighted. In some cases,
in the Mathematica's procedures and functions, the result may
contain a special space character that has Unicode F360 or appears
as "\[InvisibleSpace]" in text format. That character by default is
229
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
not visible on display, but is interpreted on input as an ordinary
space. The space character can be used as an invisible separator
between variables that are being multiplied together, as in A*B.
In connection with the above character, when programming a
number of tasks, it is necessary to distinguish between ordinary
strings and strings containing the above space characters. This
task is solved by means of function whose call StringIsItFreeQ[x]
returns True if x don't contain the characters "\[InvisibleSpace]"
and "\[InvisibleTimes]", and False otherwise. The next fragment
represents the source codes of some useful tools, processing the
strings that contain the above characters along with a number
of exemplifying examples.
In[7]:= {a = "aaaaa", b = "a\[InvisibleSpace]\[InvisibleSpace]aa
\[InvisibleSpace]aa"}
Out[7]= {"aaaaa", "aaaaa"}
In[8]:= Map[StringLength[#] &, {a, b}]
Out[8]= {5, 8}
In[9]:= Map[StringFreeQ[#, "\[InvisibleSpace]"] &, {a, b}]
Out[9]= {True, False}
In[10]:= Map[Characters[#] &, {a, b}]
Out[10]= {{"a", "a", "a", "a", "a"}, {"a", "\[InvisibleSpace]",
"\[InvisibleSpace]", "a", "a", "\[InvisibleSpace]", "a", "a"}}
In[11]:= StringIsItFreeQ[x_] := If[StringQ[x], StringFreeQ[x,
{"\[InvisibleSpace]", "\[InvisibleTimes]"}], False]
In[12]:= StringIsFreeQ[b]
Out[12]= False
In[13]:= NullStrQ[x_ /; StringQ[x]] := SameQ[x, ""] ||
MemberQ[{"\[InvisibleSpace]", "\[InvisibleTimes]", " "},
DeleteDuplicates[Characters[x]][[1]]]
In[14]:= NullStrQ["\[InvisibleSpace]\[InvisibleTimes]"]
Out[14]= True
In[15]:= PackStr[x_String] := StringReplace[x, {" " –> "",
"\[InvisibleSpace]" –> "", "\[InvisibleTimes]" –> ""}]
In[16]:= a = "aaa\[InvisibleTimes]\[InvisibleSpace]a aa \
\[InvisibleSpace] aa\[InvisibleTimes]aa";
In[17]:= StringLength[a]
Out[17]= 16
In[18]:= a = PackStr[a]
230
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
Out[18]= "aaaaaaaaaa"
In[19]:= StringLength[a]
Out[19]= 10
The function call PackStr[x] returns the result of packing of
a string x by deleting from it of all characters occurrences of the
form {" ", "\[InvisibleSpace]", "\[InvisibleTimes]"} to character
"". The function call NullStrQ[x] returns True if a string x has
the form "" or is composed of an arbitrary number of characters
{"\[InvisibleSpace]", "\[InvisibleTimes]"} in any combinations,
and False otherwise. The examples represented above, certain
features that should be taken into account when programming
tasks involving the using of such symbols are illustrated quite
clearly. Indeed, Indeed, processing of visually identical strings
and containing characters with Unicode F360,760, 765, 2082 and
like them, and not containing them, by means of some built–in
means can cause unpredictable and even unexpected results,
which requires increased attention.
Similarly to Maple, Mathematica doesn't give any possibility
to test inadmissibility of all actual arguments in block, function
or module in a point of its call, interrupting its call already on
the first inadmissible actual argument. Meanwhile, in view of
importance of revealing of all inadmissible actual arguments
only for one pass, the three procedures group TestArgsTypes ÷
TestArgsTypes2 solving this important enough problem and
presented in our MathToolBox package [16] has been created.
In contrast to the above TestArgsTypes procedures that provide
the differentiated testing of actual arguments received by a tested
object for their admissibility, a rather simple function TrueCallQ
provides testing of the call correctness of an object of type {block,
function, module} as a whole; the function call TrueCallQ[x, args]
returns True if the call x[args] is correct, and False otherwise.
To the TestArgsTypes ÷ TestArgsTypes2 and TrueCallQ in a
certain degree the TestArgsCall and TestFactArgs procedures
adjoins whose call allows to allocate definitions of a function,
block or module on which the call on the set actual arguments
is quite correct. The source codes of the above tools are in [16].
231
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
In[7]:= TestActualArgs[x_/; BlockFuncModQ[x], a_/; ListQ[a]] :=
Module[{a = ArgsBFM1[x], b = 0, c, d, d1, t},
c = Map[{b++; If[#[[2]] == "Arbitrary", True,
ToExpression["ReplaceAll[" <> "Hold[" <> #[[2]] <> "]" <>
"," <> #[[1]] <> "–>" <> ToString1[args[[b]]] <> "]"]]} &, a];
d = Map[ReleaseHold, Flatten[c]]; d1 = AllTrue[d, TrueQ];
If[d1, d1, b = 1; t = {};
Map[If[#, b++, AppendTo[t, b++]] &, d]; {False, t}]]
In[8]:= G[x_, y_ /; StringQ[y], z__ /; IntegerQ[z],
t_ /; RationalQ[t]] := {x, y, z, t}
In[9]:= TestActualArgs[G, {a, bs, 77.78, 90}]
Out[9]= {False, {2, 3, 4}}
In[10]:= TestActualArgs[G, {a, "avz", 90, 77/78}]
Out[10]= True
The call TestActualArgs[x, y] of the above procedure returns
True if actual arguments tuple y for an object x is admissible and
{False, d} where d – the positions list of nonadmissible actual y
arguments. Supposed that only test functions and patterns types
{"_","__","___"} are used in the x header (block, function, module).
In a number of cases exists an urgent need of determination
of the program objects along with their types activated directly
in the current session. That problem is solved by means of the
TypeActObj procedure whose call TypeActObj[] without any
arguments returns the nested list, whose sub–lists in the string
format by the first element contain types of active objects of the
current session, while other elements of the sub–lists are names
corresponding to this type; in addition, the types recognized by
the Mathematica, or types defined by us, in particular, {Function,
Procedure} can protrude as a type. In some sense the TypeActObj
procedure supplements the ObjType procedure [8,16]. The next
fragment represents the source code of the TypeActObj with a
typical example of its application.
In[2227]:= TypeActObj[] := Module[{a = Names["`*"], b = {}, c,
d, h, p, k = 1},
Quiet[For[k, k <= Length[a], k++, h = a[[k]]; c = ToExpression[h];
p = StringJoin["0", ToString[Head[c]]];
If[! StringFreeQ[h, "$"] || (p === Symbol &&
232
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
"Definition"[c] === Null), Continue[],
b = Append[b, {h, If[ProcQ[c], "0Procedure",
If[Head1[c] === Function, "0Function", p]]}]]]];
a = Quiet[Gather1[Select[b, ! #1[[2]] === Symbol &], 2]];
a = ToExpression[StringReplace[ToString1[DeleteDuplicates /@
Sort /@ Flatten /@ a], "AladjevProcedures`TypeActObj`" –> ""]];
Append[{}, Do[a[[k]][[1]] = StringTake[a[[k]][[1]], {2, –1}],
{k, Length[a]}]]; a]
In[2228]:= TypeActObj[]
Out[2228]= {{"Symbol", "args", "bc", "Bc", "cg", "Cg", "dims", "h",
"tan", "u", "v"}, {"List", "avz", "avz4"}, {"Times", "exp"},
{"Function", "F", "G"}, {"Procedure", "Sv", "VarsExpr"}}
The TypeActObj procedure is quite interesting in terms of
analyzing of software and other objects activated in the current
Mathematica session. The above procedure uses the Gather1
and Gather2 procedures; the second a little extend the function
Gather1, being an useful in a number of applications. The call
Gather1[L, n] returns the nested list formed on a basis of a list L
of the ListList type by means of grouping of sublists of the L by
its n–th element. Whereas the call Gather2[L] returns either the
simple list, or the list of ListList type that defines only multiple
elements of the L list with their multiplicities. At absence of the
multiple elements in L the procedure call returns the empty list,
i.e. {} [7,8,16]. In general, we have programmed many software
which extend, complement, or correct some aspects of the builtin Mathematica functions, or its software as a whole. Because
of the aforesaid the above means along with numerous means
represented by us in [8-16] can be considered as useful enough
tools at processing of the objects of various type in the current
session at procedural–functional programming of the various
problems. At that, in our opinion, the detailed analysis of their
source codes can be a rather effective remedy on the path of the
deeper mastering of programming in Mathematica. Experience
of holding of the master classes on Mathematica system with
all evidence confirms expediency of joint use of both standard
tools, and the user tools that have been created in the course of
programming of various appendices.
233
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
On one very significant point, it makes sense to stop our
attention. When working with Mathematica, it is quite real that
there is a lack of memory in its workspace. In such cases, it is
quite real that the evaluation of new procedures and functions
in the current session becomes impossible in the absence of any
diagnosis by the system. Let us give one fairly simple example
in this regard. In the current session an attempt of the evaluation
of the definition of a rather simple procedure whose source code
is presented below had been done.
In[3347]:= NamesInMfile[x_ /; FileExistsQ[x] &&
FileExtension[x] == "m"] :=
Module[{a = ReadString[x], b, c},
b = StringReplace[a, {"\n" –> "", "\r" –> ""}];
c = StringCases[b,
Shortest["(*Begin[\"`" ~~ __ ~~ "`\"]*)"]];
a = Map[StringTake[#, {11, –6}] &, c];
b = Map[If[SymbolQ[#], #, Nothing] &, a]]
Calling NamesInMfile[x] procedure returns a list of names
in string format that are contained in a file x of m–format which
contains the user package in the format described above. At the
same time, the names of the package means, without assigned
usages, are also returned. In order to resolve the given situation
without leaving the current session, we can propose an useful
approach that is based on the list format of the procedures and
functions. We represent a similar approach on the basis of the
previous procedure. The procedure, together with the factual
argument – a m–format file – is presented in the form of a list,
whose elements separator is semicolons, as the next fragment
easily illustrates.
In[3377]:= {x = "C:\\Mathematica\\MathToolBox.m";
b = StringReplace[ReadString[x], {"\n" –> "", "\r" –> ""}];
b = StringCases[b, Shortest["(*Begin[\"`" ~~ __ ~~ "`\"]*)"]];
b = Map[StringTake[#, {11, –6}] &, b];
Sort[Map[If[SymbolQ[#], #, Nothing] &, b]]}[[1]]
Out[3377]:= {"AcNb", "ActBFM", …, "$Version1", "$Version2"}
In[3378]:= Length[%]
Out[3378]= 1322
234
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
The procedure call NamesInMBfiles[x] returns a list of the
names in string format that are contained in a file x of format
"nb" which contains the user package in the format described
above. In addition, the names of the package means, without
assigned usages, are also returned. The fragment represent the
source code of the procedure with an example of its application.
In[3388]:= NamesInNBfiles[x_ /; FileExistsQ[x]] :=
Module[{c = FileConvert[x –> "#.m"], b, h, g = {}, s = {}, k},
a = ReadString[c]; DeleteFile[c];
b = "`" <> StringReplace[a, {"RowBox[{" –> "", "\n" –> "",
"\r" –> ""}] <> "`";
c = Map[#[[1]] &, StringPosition[b, "`"]];
For[k = 1, k <= Length[c] – 1, k++,
h = StringTake[b, {c[[k]], c[[k + 1]]}];
h = StringReplace[h, "`" –> ""];
If[SymbolQ[h], AppendTo[g, h], 7]]; g = DeleteDuplicates[g];
Map[If[NameQ[#] && ! SystemQ[#] && StringLength[#] > 1,
AppendTo[s, #], 7] &, g]; Sort[s]]
In[3389]:= NamesInNBfiles["C:\\math\\mathtoolbox.nb"]
Out[3389]= {"AcNb", "ActBFM", "ActBFMuserQ", …, "$Version2"}
In[3390]:= Length[%]
Out[3390]= 1317
The above mentioned procedure for solving a task uses the
FileConvert function, whose call FileConvert[F1 –> "File2.ext"]
converts the contents of source file F1 to the format defined by
the extension ext and saves the result to the file "File2.ext". In
addition, files can be converted from formats supported by the
function Import to formats supported by Export. Given that the
internal content of a certain file plays a rather significant role in
solving programming problems related to the structure of the
file, the question of converting the file into a more acceptable
format seems to be quite important. In particular, the above
procedure uses the FileConvert function for converting of the
nb–files to m–files, facilitating the task solution. This approach
has been used in a number of applications [8-15].
235
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
3.9. Certain additional tools of expressions processing in
the Mathematica software
Analogously to the most software systems the Mathematica
understands everything with what it manipulates as expression
(graphics, lists, formulas, strings, modules, functions, numbers, etc.).
And although all these expressions, at first sight, significantly
differ, Mathematica presents them in so–called full format. And
only the postponed assignment ":=" has no full format. For the
purpose of definition of the heading of an e expression (the type
defining it) the built-in Head function is used whose call Head[e]
returns the heading of an e expression:
In[3331]:= G := S; Z[x_] := Block[{}, x]; F[x_] := x; M[x_] := x;
M[x_, y_] := x + y; Map[Head, {ProcQ, Sin, 77, a + b, # &, G, Z,
Function[{x}, x], x*y, x^y, F, M}]
Out[3332]= {Symbol, Symbol, Integer, Plus, Function, Symbol,
Symbol, Function, Times, Power, Symbol, Symbol}
For more exact definition of headings we created an useful
modification of built-in Head function in the form of the Head1
procedure expanding its opportunities, for example, it concerns
testing of blocks, system functions, the user functions, modules,
etc. Thus, the call Head1[x] returns the heading of an expression
x in the context {Block, Function, Module, System, Symbol, Head[x],
PureFunction}. In addition, on the objects of the same name that
have one name with several definitions the procedure call will
return $Failed. The fragment below represents source code of
the Head1 procedure with examples of its use comparatively
with the Head function as it is illustrated by certain examples of
the following fragment on which the functional distinctions of
both tools are rather evident.
In[3333]:= Head1[x_] := Module[{a = PureDefinition[x]},
If[ListQ[a], $Failed, If[a === "System", System,
If[BlockQ[x], Block, If[ModuleQ2[x], Module,
f[PureFuncQ[x], PureFunction, If[Quiet[Check[FunctionQ[x],
False]], Function, Head[x]]]]]]]]
In[3334]:= G := S; Z[x_] := Block[{}, x]; F[x_] := x; M[x_] := x;
M[x_, y_] := x + y; Map[Head, {ProcQ, Sin, 6, a + b, # &, G, Z,
236
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
Function[{x}, x], x*y, x^y, F, M}]
Out[3334]= {Symbol, Symbol, Integer, Plus, Function, Symbol,
Symbol, Function, Times, Power, Symbol, Symbol}
In[3335]:= Map[Head1, {ProcQ, Sin, 6, a + b, # &, G, Z,
Function[{x}, x], x*y, x^y, F, M}]
Out[3335]= {Module, System, Integer, Plus, PureFunction,
Symbol, Block, PureFunction, Times, Power, Function, $Failed}
The Head1 procedure has a quite certain meaning for more
exact (relatively to system standard) classification of expressions
according to their headings. On many expressions the calls of
Head1 procedure and Head function are identical, whereas on
certain their calls significantly differ. In [2,4-6,8-16], two useful
modifications of the Head1: Head2 and Head3 are represented.
The expression concept is the important unifying principle in
the system having identical internal structure which allows to
confine a rather small amount of the basic operations. Meantime,
despite identical basic structure of expressions, Mathematica
provides a set of various functions for work as with expression,
and its separate components.
Tools of testing of correctness of expressions. The system
Mathematica has a number of the means providing the testing
of correctness of syntax of expressions among which only two
functions are available to the user, namely:
SyntaxQ["x"] – returns True, if x – a syntactic correct expression;
otherwise False is returned;
SyntaxLength["x"] – returns the quontity w of symbols, since the
beginning of a "x" string that determines syntactic correct expression
StringTake["x", {1, w}]; in a case w > StringLength["x"] the system
declares that whole "x" string is correct, demanding continuation.
In our opinion, it isn't very conveniently in case of software
processing of the expressions. Therefore extension in the form
of SyntaxLength1 procedure is of certain interest.
In[4447]:= SyntaxLength1[x_ /; StringQ[x], y___] :=
Module[{a = "", b = 1, d, h = {}, c = StringLength[x]},
While[b <= c, d = SyntaxQ[a = a <> StringTake[x, {b}]];
If[d, AppendTo[h, StringTrim2[a, {"+", "–", " "}, 3]]]; b++];
237
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
h = DeleteDuplicates[h];
If[{y} != {} && ! HowAct[{y}[[1]]], {y} = {h}];
If[h == {}, 0, StringLength[h[[–1]]]]]
In[4448]:= {SyntaxLength1["d[a[1]] + b[2]", g], g}
Out[4448]= {14, {"d", "d[a[1]]", "d[a[1]] + b", "d[a[1]] + b[2]"}}
The call SyntaxLength1[x] returns the maximum number w
of position in a string x such that the next condition is carried
out ToExpression[StringTake[x, {1, w}]] – a syntactically correct
expression, otherwise 0 (zero) is will be returned; whereas the
call SyntaxLength1[x, y] through the 2nd optional y argument –
an indefinite variable – additionally returns the list of substrings
of the string x representing correct expressions.
Unlike the SyntaxLength1 procedure, the procedure call
SyntaxLength2[j] gathers correct subexpressions extracted from
a string j into lists of expressions identical on the length. The
function call ExtrVarsOfStr1[j] returns the sorted list of possible
symbols in string format successfully extracted from a string j;
if symbols are absent, the empty list – {} is returned. Unlike the
ExtrVarsOfStr procedure the ExtrVarsOfStr1 function provides
the more exhaustive extraction of all possible symbols from the
strings. Whereas, the procedure call FactualVarsStr1[j] returns
the list of all factual variables extracted from a string j; source
code of the last tool with an example are represented below.
In[6]:= FactualVarsStr1[x_ /; StringQ[x]] := Module[{b = "",
c = {}, h, t, k, a = StringLength[x] + 1, d = x <> "[", j = 1},
While[j <= a, For[k = j, k <= a, k++,
If[SymbolQ[t = StringTake[d, {k, k}]] || t == "`", b = b <> t,
If[! MemberQ[{"", "`"}, b],
AppendTo[c, {b, If[MemberQ[CNames["AladjevProcedures`"],
b], "AladjevProcedures`", h = If[ContextQ[b], "contexts",
Quiet[ToExpression["Context[" <> b <> "]"]]];
If[h == "AladjevProcedures`", $Context, h]]}], 7]; b = ""]; j = k + 1]];
c = Map[DeleteDuplicates,
Map[Flatten, Gather[c, #1[[2]] == #2[[2]] &]]];
c = Map[Sort[#, ContextQ[#1] &] &, c];
c = Map[If[MemberQ[#, "contexts"] &&
! MemberQ[#, "Global`"], Flatten[{"contexts",
238
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
ReplaceAll[#, "contexts" –> Nothing]}], #] &, c];
c = Map[Flatten[{#[[1]], Sort[#[[2 ;; –1]]]}] &, c];
Map[If[#[[1]] != "Global`" && MemberQ[#, "contexts"],
Flatten[{"contexts", ReplaceAll[#, "contexts" –> Nothing]}], #] &, c]]
In[7]:= FactualVarsStr1[PureDefinition[StrStr]]
Out[7]= {{"AladjevProcedures`", "StrStr"}, {"Global`", "x"},
{"System`", "If", "StringJoin", "StringQ", "ToString"}}
The procedure call FactualVarsStr1[x] on the whole returns
the nested list whose sublists have contexts as the first element
whereas the others define the symbols extracted from a string x
which have these contexts. If the string x contains contexts then
"contexts" element precedes their sorted tuple in sublist. The
above means is useful enough in practical programming in the
Mathematica and their codes contain a number of rather useful
programming receptions [16].
Call SyntaxQ[x] of standard Mathematica function returns
True if a string x corresponds to syntactically correct input for a
single expression, and returns False otherwise. In addition, the
function tests only syntax of expression, ignoring its semantics
at its evaluation. Whereas the tools ExpressionQ, ExprQ, Expr1Q
along with the syntax provide testing of expressions regarding
their semantic correctness. The calls of all these tools on a string
x returns True if string x contains a syntactically and semantically
correct single expression, and False otherwise. Fragment below
represents source code of the ExprQ1 function and examples of
its use in comparison with the built–in SyntaxQ function.
In[2214]:= Expr1Q[x_ /; StringQ[x]] :=
Quiet[Check[SameQ[ToExpression[x], ToExpression[x]], False]]
In[2215]:= {z, a, c, d} = {500, 90, 77, 42}; SyntaxQ["z=(c+d)*a/0"]
Out[2215]= True
In[2216]:= Expr1Q["z=(c+d)*a/0"]
Out[2216]= False
In[2217]:= {SyntaxQ["77 = 72"], Expr1Q["77 = 72"]}
Out[2217]= {True, False}
Thus, the function call Expr1Q[x] returns False only if the call
ToExpression[x] causes an erroneous situation for a string x that
contains some expression.
239
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
It is possible to apply the Cases function for definition of
the expressions coinciding with a given pattern, however not
all problems of expressions comparison with patterns are solved
by the standard means. For solution of the problem in broader
aspect the EquExprPatt procedure can be rather useful whose
call EquExprPatt[x, p] returns True if expression x corresponds
to the given p pattern, and False otherwise. The fragment below
presents source code of the procedure and an example of its use.
In[1395]:= EquExprPatt[x_, y_ /; ExprPatternQ[y]] :=
Module[{c, d = {}, j, t, v = {}, k = 1, p, g = {}, s = {},
a = Map[FullForm, Map[Expand, {x, y}]],
b = Mapp[MinusList, Map[OP, Map[Expand, {x, y}]],
{FullForm}], z = SetAttributes[ToString, Listable], w},
{b, c} = ToString[{b, a}]; p = StringPosition[c[[2]], {"Pattern[",
"Blank[]]"}];
While[k = 2*k–1; k <= Length[p], AppendTo[d, StringTake[c[[2]],
{p[[k]][[1]], p[[k + 1]][[2]]}]]; k++]; {t, k} = {ToExpression[d], 1};
While[k <= Length[t], AppendTo[v, StringJoin[ToString[Op[t[[k]]]]]];
k++]; v = ToString[v]; v = Map13[Rule, {d, v}];
v = StringReplace[c[[2]], v]; b = Quiet[Mapp[Select, b, ! SystemQ[#]||
BlockFuncModQ[ToString[#]] &]];
{b, k, j} = {ToString[b], 1, 1};
While[k <= Length[b[[1]]], z = b[[1]][[k]];
AppendTo[g, {"[" <> z <> "," –> "[w", " " <> z <> "," –> " w",
"[" <> z <> "]" –> "[w]", " " <> z <> "]" –> " w]"}]; k++];
While[j <= Length[b[[2]]], z = b[[2]][[j]];
AppendTo[s, {"[" <> z <> "," –> "[w", " " <> z <> "," –> " w",
"[" <> z <> "]" –> "[w]", " " <> z <> "]" –> " w]"}]; j++];
ClearAttributes[ToString, Listable];
z = Map9[StringReplace, {c[[1]], v}, Map[Flatten, {g, s}]];
SameQ[z[[1]], StringReplace[z[[2]], Join[GenRules[Flatten[Map[# <>
"," &, Map[ToString, t]]], "w"], GenRules[Flatten[Map[# <> "]" &,
Map[ToString, t]]], "w]"], GenRules[Flatten[Map[# <> ")" &,
Map[ToString, t]]], "w)"]]]]]
In[1396]:= Mapp[EquExprPatt, {a + b*c^5, 5 + 6*y^7, a + b*p^m,
a + b*m^p}, a + b*x_^n_]
Out[1396]= {True, True, True, True}
240
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
Expressions processing at level of their components. Means
of this group provide a quite effective differentiated processing
of expressions. Because of combined symbolical architecture the
Mathematica gives a possibility of direct generalization of the
element–oriented list operations to arbitrary expressions, that
allows to support operations as on separate terms, and on sets
of terms at the given levels in trees of the expressions. Without
going into details to all tools supporting work with components
of expressions, we will give only the main from them that have
been complemented by our means. Whereas with more detailed
description of built–in tools of this group, including admissible
formats of coding, it is possible to get acquainted in the Help, or
in the corresponding literature on the Mathematica system.
The call Variables[p] of built–in function returns the list of
all independent variables of a polynomial p, at the same time,
its application to an arbitrary expression has some limitations.
Meantime for receiving all independent variables of a certain
expression x it is quite possible to use a simple function whose
call UnDefVars[x] returns the list of all independent variables
of an expression x. Unlike the UnDefVars the call UnDefVars1[x]
returns the list of all independent variables in string format of
an expression x. In certain cases the mentioned functions have
certain preferences relative to the built–in Variables function.
The call Replace[x, r {, j}] of built–in function returns result
of application of a rule r of the form a → b or list of such rules
for transformation of x expression as a whole; application of the
3rd optional j argument defines application of r rules to parts of
j level of a x expression. Meantime, the built-in Replace function
has a number of restrictions some of which a simple procedure
considerably obviates, whose call Replace1[x, r] returns result
of application of r rules to all or selective independent variables
of x expression. In a case of detection by the procedure Replace1
of empty rules the appropriate message will be printed with the
indication of the list of those r rules that were empty, i.e. whose
left parts aren't entered into the list of independent variables of
x expression. Fragment below presents source code of Replace1
241
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
with examples of its use; in addition, comparison with result of
use of the Replace function on the same expression is done.
In[33]:= Replace1[x_, y_ /; ListQ[y] &&
DeleteDuplicates[Map[Head, y]] == {Rule}||Head[y] == Rule] :=
Module[{a = x // FullForm // ToString, b = UnDefVars[x], c, p, l,
h = {}, r, k = 1, d = ToStringRule[DeleteDuplicates[Flatten[{y}]]]},
p = Map14[RhsLhs, d, "Lhs"];
c = Select[p, ! MemberQ[Map[ToString, b], #] &];
If[c != {}, Print["Rules " <> ToString[Flatten[Select[d, MemberQ[c,
RhsLhs[#, "Lhs"]] &]]] <> " are vacuous"]];
While[k <= Length[d], l = RhsLhs[d[[k]], "Lhs"];
r = RhsLhs[d[[k]], "Rhs"];
h = Append[h, {"[" <> l –> "[" <> r, " " <> l –> " " <> r,
l <> "]" –> r <> "]"}]; k++];
Simplify[ToExpression[StringReplace[a, Flatten[h]]]]]
In[34]:= X = (x^2 – y^2)/(Sin[x] + Cos[y]) + a*Log[x + y];
Replace[X, {x –> a + b, a –> 90, y –> Cos[a], z –> Log[t]}]
Out[34]= a*Log[x + y] + (x^2 – y^2)/(Cos[y] + Sin[x])
In[35]:= Replace1[X, {x –> a + b, a –> 90, y –> Cos[a], z –> Log[t],
t –> c + d}]
Rules {ComplexInfinity –> (Log[t]), t –> (c + d)} are vacuous
Out[35]= 90*Log[a + b + Cos[a]] + ((a + b)^2 – Cos[a]^2)/
(Cos[Cos[a]] + Sin[a + b])
Due to quite admissible impossibility of performance of the
replacements of subexpressions of an expression at the required
its levels, there are questions as of belonging of subexpressions
of expression to its levels, and of belonging of subexpression to
the given expression level. The following two procedures in a
certain extent solve these problems. A call SubExprOnLevels[x]
returns the nested list whose 2–element sublists contain levels
numbers as the first elements, and lists of subexpressions on
these levels as the second elements of an expression x. Whereas
the call ExprOnLevelQ[x, y, z] returns True if a y subexpression
belongs to the z–th level of x expression, and False otherwise. In
addition, in a case of False return, the call ExprOnLevelQ[x, y, z, t]
through the optional t argument – an indefinite symbol – returns
additionally the list of levels numbers of the x expression which
242
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
contain the y as a subexpression. The fragment below represents
the source codes of both procedures with examples of their use.
In[1137]:= SubExprOnLevels[x_] := Module[{a, b, c = {}},
Do[If[Set[a, DeleteDuplicates[Level[x, {j}]]] ===
Set[b, DeleteDuplicates[Level[x, {j + 1}]]], Return[c],
AppendTo[c, {j, a}]], {j, Infinity}]]
In[1138]:= SubExprOnLevels[(x^2 + y^2)/(x + y)]
Out[1138]= {{1, {1/(x + y), x^2 + y^2}}, {2, {x + y, –1, x^2, y^2}},
{3, {x, y, 2}}}
In[1140]:= ExprOnLevelQ[x_, y_, z_Integer, t___] :=
Module[{a = SubExprOnLevels[x], b = {}, c = {}},
If[! MemberQ[Map[#[[1]] &, a], z], False,
If[MemberQ[a[[z]][[2]], y], True, If[{t} != {} && NullQ[t],
Do[If[MemberQ[a[[j]][[2]], y], AppendTo[b, a[[j]][[1]]], 7],
{j, Length[a]}]; t = b; False, 7]]]]
In[1141]:= ExprOnLevelQ[(x + y)/(x + a*x^2/b^2), x^2, 1, agn]
Out[1141]= False
In[1142]:= agn
Out[1142]= {4}
At structural analysis of expressions, a quite certain interest
is the CompOfExpr procedure, which allows to determine the
component composition of an algebraical expression.
In[7]:= CompOfExpr[x_] :=
Module[{a = ToString[FullForm[x]],
b = Map[ToString, FullFormF[]],
Num = {}, Str = {}, Sys = {}, Vars = {}, User = {}, av},
ClearAll[av]; a = StringReplace4[a, GenRules[b, ""], av];
a = "{" <> StringReplace[a, {"[" –> ",", "]" –> ","}] <> "}";
a = Select[ToExpression[a], ! SameQ[#, Null] &];
a = Sort[DeleteDuplicates[a]];
Map[If[StringQ[#], AppendTo[Str, #],
If[NumericQ[#], AppendTo[Num, #],
If[SystemQ[#], AppendTo[Sys, #],
If[BlockFuncModQ[#], AppendTo[User, #],
AppendTo[Vars, #]]]]] &, a];
{{"Sys", Sys}, {"User", User}, {"Vars", Vars}, {"Str", Str},
{"Num", Num}, {"Op", ToExpression[Complement[b, av[[2]]]]}}]
243
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
In[8]:= X = {(x^2 – y^2)/(Sin[x]+Cos[y])/a^Log[x+y], {"a", "b", "c"},
ToExpression["ToString1"], ToExpression["CompOfExpr"]};
In[9]:= CompOfExpr[X]
Out[9]= {{"Sys", {Cos, List, Log, Sin}}, {"User", {CompOfExpr,
ToString1}}, {"Vars", {a, x, y}}, {"Str", {"a", "b", "c"}},
{"Num", {–1, 2}}, {"Op", {Plus, Power, Times}}}
In[10]:= CompOfExpr[{(Sin[x] + b)/(Cos[y] + c), ToString1,
ProcQ, {73, 78}, "agn"}]
Out[10]= {{"Sys", {Cos, List, Sin}}, {"User", {ProcQ, ToString1}},
{"Vars", {b, c, x, y}}, {"Str", {"agn"}}, {"Num", {–1, 73, 78}},
{"Op", {Plus, Power, Times}}}
Calling CompOfExpr[x] procedure returns the nested list of
two–element sub–lists; each sub–list contains one of the words
"Sys" (system tools), "User" (the user tools), "Vars" (variables), "Str"
(strings), "Num" (numbers), "Op" (operations) as the first element,
while the second element represents the list of components (type
of which is defined by the corresponding first word) of an algebraical
x expression.
In the certain cases exists necessity to execute the exchange
of values of variables with the corresponding exchange of all
their attributes. So, variables x and y having values 77 and 72
should receive the values 42 and 47 accordingly along with the
appropriate exchange of all their attributes. The procedure call
VarExch[x, y] solves this problem, returning Null, i.e. nothing.
The list of two names of variables in string format for exchange
by values and attributes or the nested list of ListList type acts as
the actual argument; anyway all elements of pairs of the list
have to be definite, otherwise the call returns Null with printing
of the appropriate diagnostic message, for example:
In[7]:= x = a + b; y = m – n; SetAttributes[x, {Protected, Listable}]
In[8]:= {x, y}
Out[8]= {a + b, m – n}
In[9]:= VarExch[{"x", "y"}]
In[10]:= Definition[x]
Out[10]= x = m – n
In[11]:= Definition[y]
Out[11]= Attributes[y] = {Listable, Protected}
y=a+b
244
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
On the other hand, the procedure call Rename[x, y] in the
regular mode returns Null, providing replacement of x name of
some defined object on y name with saving of all attributes of
this object. In addition, the x name is removed from the current
session by the Remove function. But if y argument defines the
name of a defined object or an undefined name with attributes,
the call is returned unevaluated. If the first x argument is illegal
for renaming, the procedure call returns Null; in addition, the
Rename procedure successfully processes also objects of the
same name of type "Block", "Function", "Module". The Rename1
procedure is an useful version of the above procedure, being
based on our procedure Definition2. The call Rename1[x, y] is
similar to the call Rename[x, y] whereas the call Rename1[x, y, z]
with the third optional z argument – an arbitrary expression –
performs the same functions as the call Rename1[x, y] without
change of an initial x object.
The VarExch1 procedure is a version of the above VarExch
procedure and is based on use of the Rename procedure with
global variables; it admits the same type of actual argument, but
unlike the second procedure the call VarExch1[w] in a case of
detection of indefinite elements of a list w or its sublists will be
returned unevaluated without print of any diagnostic message.
In the fragment below, source code of the Rename1 procedure
along with typical examples of its application is represented.
In[7]:= Rename1[x_String /; HowAct[x], y_ /; ! HowAct[y], z___] :=
Module[{a = Attributes[x], b = Definition2[x][[1 ;; –2]],
c = ToString[y]},
b = Map[StringReplacePart[#, c, {1, StringLength[x]}] &, b];
ToExpression[b];
ToExpression["SetAttributes[" <> c <> ", " <> ToString[a] <> "]"];
If[{z} == {}, ToExpression["ClearAttributes[" <> x <> ", " <>
ToString[a] <> "]; Remove[" <> x <> "]"], Null]]
In[8]:= x := 500; y = 500; SetAttributes[x, {Listable, Protected}]
In[9]:= Rename1["x", Trg42]
In[10]:= {x, Trg42, Attributes["Trg42"]}
Out[10]= {x, 500, {Listable, Protected}}
245
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
In[11]:= Rename1["y", Trg47, 90]
In[12]:= {y, Trg47, Attributes["Trg47"]}
Out[12]= {500, 500, {}}
Use in procedures of global variables, in a lot of cases will
allow to simplify programming, sometimes significantly. This
mechanism sufficient in detail is considered in [15]. Meanwhile,
mechanism of global variables in Mathematica isn't universal,
quite correctly working in a case of evaluation of definitions of
procedures containing global variables in the current session in
the Input–paragraph; whereas in general case it isn't supported
when the loading in the current session of the procedures that
contain global variables, in particular, from nb–files with the
subsequent activation of their contents.
For the purpose of exclusion of similar situation a tool has
been offered, whose call NbCallProc[x] reactivates a block, a
function or a module x in the current session, whose definition
was in a nb–file loaded into the current session with returning
of Null, i.e. nothing. The call NbCallProc[x] reactivates in the
current session all definitions of blocks, functions and modules
with the same name x and with different headings. All these
definitions have to be loaded previously from some nb–file into
the current session and activated by means of function "Evaluate
Notebook" of the GUI. The following fragment represents source
code of the NbCallProc procedure with example of its use for
the above VarExch1 procedure that uses the global variables.
In[2442]:= NbCallProc[x_ /; BlockFuncModQ[x]] :=
Module[{a = SubsDel[StringReplace[ToString1[DefFunc[x]],
"\n \n" –> ";"], "`" <> ToString[x] <> "`", {"[", ","}, –1]}, Clear[x];
ToExpression[a]]
In[2443]:= NbCallProc[VarExch1]
The performed verification convincingly demonstrates, that
the VarExch1 that contains the global variables and uploaded
from the nb–file with subsequent its activation (by the "Evaluate
Notebook"), is carried out absolutely correctly and with correct
functioning of mechanism of global variables restoring values
after an exit from the VarExch1 procedure. The NbCallProc has
246
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
a number of rather interesting appendices above all if necessity
of aplication of procedures activated in the Input–paragraph of
the current session arises.
Maple has 2 useful tools of manipulation with expressions
of the type {range, equation, inequality, relation}, whose calls
lhs(Exp) and rhs(Exp) return the left and the right parts of an
expression Exp respectively. More precisely, the call lhs(Exp),
rhs(Exp) returns a value op(1, Exp) and op(2, Exp) respectively.
Whereas Mathematica has no similar useful means. The given
deficiency is compensated by the RhsLhs procedure, whose the
source code with examples of application are given below. The
call RhsLhs[w, y] depending on a value {"Rhs", "Lhs"} of the
second y argument returns right or left part of w expressions
respectively relatively to operator Head[w], whereas the call
RhsLhs[x,y,t] in addition through an indefined t variable returns
operator Head[x] concerning whom splitting of the x expression
onto left and right parts was made. RhsLhs procedure can be
rather easily modified in the light of expansion of the analyzed
operators Head[x]. RhsLhs1 procedure is a certain functional
equivalent to the previous procedure [8-16].
In[7]:= RhsLhs[x__] := Module[{a = Head[{x}[[1]]],
b = ToString[InputForm[{x}[[1]]]], d, h = {x},
c = {{Greater, ">"}, {Or, "||"}, {GreaterEqual, ">="}, {Span, ";;"},
{And, "&&"}, {LessEqual, "<="}, {Unequal, "!="}, {Rule, "–>"},
{Less, "<"}, {Plus, {"+", "–"}}, {Power, "^"}, {Equal, "=="},
{NonCommutativeMultiply, "**"}, {Times, {"*", "/"}}}},
If[Length[h] < 2 || ! MemberQ[{"Lhs", "Rhs"}, h[[2]]],
Return[Defer[RhsLhs[x]]], Null];
If[! MemberQ[Select[Flatten[c], ! StringQ[#] &], a] ||
a == Symbol, Return[Defer[RhsLhs[x]]], Null];
d = StringPosition[b, Flatten[Select[c, #[[1]] == a &], 1][[2]]];
a = Flatten[Select[c, #[[1]] == a &]];
If[Length[h] >= 3 && ! HowAct[h[[3]]],
ToExpression[ToString[h[[3]]] <> "=" <> ToString1[a]], Null];
ToExpression[If[h[[2]] == "Lhs",
StringTrim[StringTake[b, {1, d[[1]][[1]] – 1}]],
StringTrim[StringTake[b, {d[[1]][[2]] + 1, –1}]]]]]
247
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
In[8]:= Mapp[RhsLhs, {a^b, a*b, a –> b, a <= b, a||b, a && b}, "Rhs"]
Out[8]= {b, b, b, b, b, b}
In[9]:= {{RhsLhs[7 ;; 42, "Rhs", s], s}, {RhsLhs[a && b, "Lhs", v], v}}
Out[9]= {{42, {Span, ";;"}}, {a, {And, "&&"}}}
In a number of appendices the undoubted interest presents
an analog of the Maple-procedure whattype(x) that returns the
type of an expression x which is one of basic Maple–types. The
procedure of the same name acts as a similar analog in system
Mathematica whose call WhatType[x] returns type of an object
x of one of basic types {"Module", "DynamicModule", "Complex",
"Block", "Real", "Integer", "Rational", "Times", "Rule", "Power",
"And", "Alternatives", "List", "Plus", "Condition", "StringJoin",
"UndirectedEdge", …}. The fragment represents source code of
the procedure and examples of its application for identification
of the types of various objects.
In[7]:= WhatType[x_ /; StringQ[x]] := Module[{b = t, d,
c = $Packages, a = Quiet[Head[ToExpression[x]]]},
If[a === Symbol, Clear[t]; d = Context[x];
If[d == "Global`", d = Quiet[ProcFuncBlQ[x, t]];
If[d === True, Return[{t, t = b}[[1]]],
Return[{"Undefined", t = b}[[1]]]],
If[d == "System`", Return[{d, t = b}[[1]]], Null]],
Return[{ToString[a], t = b}[[1]]]];
If[Quiet[ProcFuncBlQ[x, t]],
If[MemberQ[{"Module", "DynamicModule", "Block"}, t],
Return[{t, t = b}[[1]]], t = b;
ToString[Quiet[Head[ToExpression[x]]]]], t = b; "Undefined"]]
In[8]:= Map[WhatType, {"a^b", "a**b", "3+7*I", "{42, 47}", "a&&b"}]
Out[8]= {"Power", "NonCommutativeMultiply", "Complex",
"List", "And"}
In[9]:= Map[WhatType, {"a_/; b", "a <> b", "a <–> b", "a|b"}]
Out[9]= {"Condition", "StringJoin", "TwoWayRule", "Alternatives"}
However, it should be noted that the WhatType procedure
don`t support exhaustive testing of types, meantime on its basis
it is simple to expand the class of the tested types.
The functions Replace and ReplaceAll of Mathematica have
essential restrictions in relation to replacement of subexpressions
relatively of very simple expressions as it will illustrated below.
248
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
The reason of it can be explained by the following circumstance,
using the procedure useful enough also as independent means.
The call ExpOnLevels[x, y, z] returns the list of an expression x
levels on which an subexpression y is located. While procedure
call with the third optional z argument – an undefinite symbol –
through it additionally returns the nested list of ListList type of
all subexpressions of expression x on all its levels. In addition,
the first element of each sublist of such ListList list determines a
level of the x expression while the second element defines the
list of subexpressions located on this level. If subexpression y is
absent on the levels identified by Level function, the procedure
call returns the appropriate diagnostic message. The fragment
below presents source code of the ExpOnLevels procedure with
typical examples of its application.
In[7]:= ExpOnLevels[x_, y_, z___] := Module[{a = {}, b},
Do[AppendTo[a, {j, Set[b, Level[x, {j}]]}];
If[b == {}, Break[], Continue[]], {j, 1, Infinity}];
a = a[[1 ;; –2]]; If[{z} != {} && NullQ[z], z = a, 77];
b = Map[If[MemberQ[#[[2]], y], #[[1]], Nothing] &, a];
If[b == {}, "Subexpression " <> ToString1[y] <>
" can't be identified", b]]
In[8]:= ExpOnLevels[a + b^3 + 1/x^(3/(a + 2)) + b[t] + 1/x^2, x^2]
Out[8]= "Subexpression x^2 can't be identified"
In[9]:= ExpOnLevels[a + b^3 + 1/x^(3/(a + 2)) + b[t] + a/x^2, x^2, g]
Out[9]= "Subexpression x^2 can't be identified"
In[10]:= g
Out[10]= {{1, {a, b^3, a/x^2, x^(–(3/(2 + a))), b[t]}},
{2, {b, 3, a, 1/x^2, x, –(3/(2 + a)), t}}, {3, {x, –2, –3, 1/2 + a)}},
{4, {2 + a, –1}}, {5, {2, a}}}
Replacement subexpressions in expressions. The procedure
ExpOnLevels can determine admissible replacements carring
out by means of the standard functions Replace and ReplaceAll
as they are based on the Level function that evaluates the list of
all subexpressions of an expression on the set levels. The call of
the built–in Replace function on unused rules don`t return any
diagnostical information, at the same time, if all rules were not
used, then the function call is returned as unevaluated. In turn,
249
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
the procedure below that is based on the previous ExpOnLevels
procedure gives full diagnostics concerning the unused rules.
The procedure call ReplaceInExpr[x, y, z] is analogous to the call
Replace[x, y, All] where y is a rule or their list whereas thru the
3rd optional z argument – an undefined symbol – additionally is
returned the message identifying the list of the unused rules.
The procedure call ReplaceInExpr1[x, y, z] is analogous to
the call ReplaceInExpr[x, y, z] but not its result where y is a rule
or their list whereas through the third optional z argument – an
undefined symbol – additionally the message is returned which
identifies a list of the unused rules. If unused rules are absent,
then the z symbol remains undefined. The following fragment
represents source code of the ReplaceInExpr1 procedure with
typical examples of its application. Of the presented examples
one can clearly see the difference between both procedures.
In[7]:= ReplaceInExpr1[x_, r_/; RuleQ[r]||ListRulesQ[r], y___] :=
Module[{a = ToString1 @@ {ToBoxes @@ {x}}, b,
c = If[RuleQ[r], {r}, r], d, h = {}},
Do[b = ToString1 @@ {ToBoxes @@ {c[[j]][[1]]}};
d = ToString1 @@ {ToBoxes @@ {c[[j]][[2]]}};
If[StringFreeQ[a, b], AppendTo[h, j],
a = StringReplace[a, b –> d]], {j, 1, Length[c]}];
a = ToExpression[a]; If[{y} != {} && NullQ[y], y = h, 77];
ReleaseHold[MakeExpression[a, StandardForm]]]
In[8]:= ReplaceInExpr1[x^2 + 1/x^2 + c[t], {x^2 –> m^3, t –> j[x]}]
Out[8]= 1/m^3 + m^3 + c[2[x]]
In[9]:= ReplaceInExpr1[(a + b[t]) + 1/x^(3/(b[t] + 2)) + b[t] +
a/x^2, {x^2 –> mp, b[t] –> gsv, x^3 –> tag, a –> 77}, gs]
Out[9]= 77 + 2*gsv + 77/mp + x^(–(3/(2 + gsv)))
In[10]:= gs
Out[10]= {3}
In[11]:= ReplaceInExpr[(a + b[t]) + 1/x^(3/(b[t] + 2)) + b[t] +
a/x^2, {x^2 –> mp, b[t] –> gsv, x^3 –> tag, a –> 77}, gs1]
Out[11]= 77 + 2*gsv + 77/x^2 + x^(–(3/(2 + gsv)))
In[12]:= gs1
Out[12]= "Rules {1, 3} were not used"
Using the built-in ToBoxes function that creates the boxes
corresponding to the printed form of expressions in the form
250
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
StandardForm, we can allocate the subexpressions composing
an expression. The procedure call SubExpressions[x] returns
the list of subexpressions composing an expression x, in a case
of impossibility the empty list is returned, i.e. {}. The fragment
below represents source code of the SubExpressions procedure
with a typical example of its application.
In[12]:= SubExpressions[x_] := Module[{b, c = {}, d, h, t,
a = ToString1[ToBoxes[x]]},
b = Select[ExtrVarsOfStr[a, 2], SystemQ[#] || UserQ[#] &];
Do[h = b[[j]]; d = StringPosition[a, h];
Do[t = "["; Do[If[StringCount[t, "["] == StringCount[t, "]"],
AppendTo[c, h <> t]; Break[],
t = t <> StringTake[a, {d[[p]][[2]] + k + 1}]], {k, 1, Infinity}],
{p, 1, Length[d]}], {j, 1, Length[b]}];
c = Map[Quiet[Check[ToExpression[#], Nothing]] &, c];
Map[ReleaseHold[MakeExpression[#, StandardForm]] &, c]]
In[13]:= SubExpressions[a*b + 1/x^(3/(b[t] + 2)) + J[t] + d/x^2]
Out[13]= {d/x^2, 3/(2 + b[t]), a*b + d/x^2 + x^(–(3/(2 + b[t]))) + J[t],
a*b, –(3/(2 + b[t])), 2 + b[t], b[t], Sin[t], x^2, x^(–(3/(2 + b[t])))}
Unlike the above SubExpressions procedure, the procedure
SubExpressions1 is based on the standard FullForm function.
The call SubExpressions1[x] returns the list of sub–expressions
that compose an expression x, while in a case of impossibility
the empty list is returned, i.e. {}. The system Level function and
our SubExpressions ÷ SubExpressions2 means allow to outline
possibilities of the Mathematica concerning the replacements
of the sub–expressions in expressions [8,12-16].
As an alternative to the above tools can be offered the Subs
procedure that is functionally equivalent to the above standard
ReplaceAll function, however which is relieved of a number of
its shortcomings. Procedure call Subs[x, y, z] returns the result
of substitutions to an expression x of all occurrences of y sub–
expressions onto z expressions. In addition, if x – an arbitrary
correct expression, then as the 2nd and 3rd arguments defining
substitutions of format y –> z, an unary substitution or their list
coded in form y ≡ {y1, y2,…,yn} and z ≡ {z1, z2,…,zn} act, defining
251
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
the list of substitutions {y1 –> z1, y2 –> z2, …, yn –> zn} which are
carried out consistently in the order defined at the Subs call. A
number of bright examples of its use on those expressions and
with those types of substitutions where the Subs surpasses the
standard ReplaceAll function is represented, in particular, in
[8-15]. These examples rather clearly illustrate advantages of
the Subs procedure before the similar system software.
At last, Substitution is an integrated procedure of the tools
Subs ÷ Subs2. The procedure call Substitution[x, y, z] returns
the result of substitutions into an arbitrary x expression of an
expression z instead of occurrences in it of all y subexpressions.
In addition, if as x expression any correct expression admitted
in Math–language is used, whereas as a single substitution or
their set are coded y ≡ {y1,y2,...,yn} and z ≡ {z1,z2,...,zn} as the 2nd
and 3rd arguments defining substitutions of the format y –> z by
defining the set of substitutions {y1 –> z1, y2 –> z2, ..., yn –> zn}
carried out consistently. The Substitution allows essentially to
extend possibilities of expressions processing. The following
fragment represents source code of the Substitution procedure
and examples of its application, well illustrating its advantages
over the standard means.
In[7]:= Substitution[x_, y_, z_] := Module[{d, k = 2, subs, subs1},
subs[m_, n_, p_] := Module[{a, b, c, h, t},
If[! HowAct[n], m /. n –> p, {a, b, c, h} =
First[{Map[ToString, Map[InputForm, {m, n, p, 1/n}]]}];
Simplify[ToExpression[StringReplace[StringReplace[a,
b –> "(" <> c <> ")"], h –> "1/" <> "(" <> c <> ")"]]];
If[t === m, m /. n –> p, t]]];
subs1[m_, n_, p_] := ToExpression[StringReplace[ToString[
FullForm[m]],
ToString[FullForm[n]] –> ToString[FullForm[p]]]];
If[! ListQ[y] && ! ListQ[z], If[Numerator[y] == 1 &&
! SameQ[Denominator[y], 1], subs1[x, y, z],
subs[x, y, z]], If[ListQ[y] && ListQ[z] && Length[y] ==
Length[z], If[Numerator[y[[1]]] == 1 &&
! SameQ[Denominator[y[[1]]], 1],
d = subs1[x, y[[1]], z[[1]]], d = subs[x, y[[1]], z[[1]]]];
252
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
For[k, k <= Length[y], k++, If[Numerator[y[[k]]] == 1 &&
! SameQ[Denominator[y[[k]]], 1], d = subs1[d, y[[k]], z[[k]]],
d = subs[d, y[[k]], z[[k]]]]]; d, Defer[Substitution[x, y, z]]]]]
In[8]:= Replace[1/x^2 + 1/y^3, {{x^2 –> a + b}, {y^3 –> c + d}}]
Out[8]= {1/x^2 + 1/y^3, 1/x^2 + 1/y^3}
In[9]:= Substitution[1/x^2 + 1/y^3, {x^2, y^3}, {a + b, c + d}]
Out[9]= 1/(a + b) + 1/(c + d)
In[10]:= Replace[1/x^2*1/y^3, {{1/x^2 –> a + b}, {1/y^3 –> c + d}}]
Out[10]= {1/(x^2 y^3), 1/(x^2 y^3)}
In[11]:= Substitution[1/x^2*1/y^3, {x^2, y^3}, {a + b, c + d}]
Out[11]= 1/((a + b)*(c + d))
It should be noted that the Substitution procedure rather
significantly extends the standard tools intended for ensuring
replacements of subexpressions in expressions as the following
examples rather visually illustrate. The Substitution1 procedure
can be considered as an analog of the Substitution procedure.
Syntax of the procedure call Substitution1[x, y, z] is identical to
the procedure call Substitution[x, y, z], returning the result of
substitutions into arbitrary x expression of z subexpression(s)
instead of all occurences of y subexpression(s). A quite simple
Substitution2 function is the simplified version of the previous
Substitution procedure, its call Substitution2[x, y, z] returns the
result of substitutions into an expression x of a subexpression z
instead of all occurences of a subexpression y. The Substitution2
function significantly uses expressions in the FullForm form and
supports a rather wide range of substitutions.
In[2211]:= Substitution2[x_, y_, z_] :=
ToExpression[StringReplace[ToString[FullForm[x]],
ToString[FullForm[y]] –> ToString[FullForm[z]]]]
In[2212]:= Substitution2[Sin[x^2]*Cos[1/b^3], 1/b^3, x^2]
Out[2212]= Cos[x^2]*Sin[x^2]
In[2213]:= Substitution2[1 + 1/x^2, x^2, a + b]
Out[2213]= 1 + 1/x^2
Meantime, already the second example of application of the
function reveals its shortcomings, forcing on the same basis to
complicate its algorithm. The following version in the procedure
form somewhat enhances the function`s possibilities.
253
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
In[2242]:= Substitution3[x_, y_, z_] := Module[{c,
a = ToString[FullForm[Simplify[x]]], b = ToString[FullForm[z]]},
c = Map[ToString[FullForm[#]] &, {y, 1/y}];
c = GenRules[c, b]; ToExpression[StringReplace[a, c]]]
In[2243]:= Substitution3[1 + 1/x^2, x^2, a + b]
Out[2243]= 1 + a + b
In[2244]:= Substitution3[x^2 + 1/(a + 1/x^2), x^2, a + b]
Out[2244]= a + b + 1/(2*a + b)
In[2245]:= Substitution3[x^2 + 1/(1/x^2 + x^2), x^2, a + b]
Out[2245]= a + b + 1/(2*a + 2*b)
In[2246]:= Substitution[x^2 + 1/(1/x^2 + x^2), x^2, a + b]
Out[2246]= a + b + 1/(a + b + 1/(a + b))
Meantime, and the above version of the Substitution2 don`t
fully solve the problem, as illustrated by the 3rd example of the
previous fragment, making it impractical to further complicate
such FullForm–based means. And only the above Substitution
procedure solves the set problem.
The following procedure allows to eliminate restrictions
inherent in means of the above so–called Subs–group. The call
SubsInExpr[x,r] returns the result of substitution in an arbitrary
expression x set in the form Hold[x] of the rigth parts of a rule
or their list r instead of occurences of the left parts corresponding
them. In addition, all the left an the rigth parts of r rules should
be coded in the Hold-form, otherwise the procedure call returns
$Failed with printing of the appropriate message. The fragment
below represents source code of the SubsInExpr procedure with
typical examples of its application.
In[2261]:= SubsInExpr[x_ /; Head[x] == Hold, r_ /; RuleQ[r] ||
ListRulesQ[r]] := Module[{a, b, c, f},
c = Map[Head[(#)[[1]]] === Hold && Head[(#)[[2]]] === Hold &,
Set[b, Flatten[{r}]]]; If[! And @@ c,
Print["Incorrect tuple of factual arguments"]; $Failed,
f[t_] := StringTake[ToString1[t], {6, –2}]; a = f[x];
c = Map[Rule[f[#[[1]]], "(" <> f[#[[2]]] <> ")"] &, b];
ToExpression[StringReplaceVars[a, c]]]]
In[2262]:= SubsInExpr[Hold[(a + b^3)/(c + d^(–2))],
Hold[d^–2] –> Hold[Sin[t]]]
254
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
Out[2262]= (a + b^3)/(c + Sin[t])
In[2263]:= SubsInExpr[Hold[1/(a + 1/x^2)],
Hold[1/x^2] –> Hold[Sin[t]]]
Out[2263]= 1/(a + Sin[t])
The function call SubsInExpr1[x,r] analogously to the above
SubsInExpr procedure also returns the substitution result in an
expression x set in the string format of the rigth parts of a rule
or their list r instead of occurences of the left parts corresponding
them. At that, in contrast to the the above SubsInExpr procedure
all the left an the rigth parts of the rules r should be also coded
in string format like its first argument, otherwise the function
call is returned unevaluated. Fragment below represents source
code of the function SubsInExpr1 with examples of its use.
In[7]:= SubsInExpr1[x_ /; StringQ[x], r_ /; (RuleQ[r] ||
ListRulesQ[r]) && (And @@ Map[StringQ[(#)[[1]]] &&
StringQ[(#)[[2]]] &, Flatten[{r}]])] :=
ToExpression[StringReplaceVars[x, r]]
In[8]:= SubsInExpr1["1/x^2", "1/x^2" –> "Sin[t]"]
Out[8]= Sin[t]
In[9]:= SubsInExpr1["(a + b^3)/(c + d^(–2))", "d^(–2)" –> "Sin[t]"]
Out[9]= (a + b^3)/(c + Sin[t])
On a basis of our means of replacement of subexpressions
in expressions, the means of differentiation and integration of
expressions are programmed. For example, the Subs procedure
is used in realization of the Df procedure [8] whose call Df[x, y]
provides differentiation of an expression x on its arbitrary y subexpression, and rather significantly extends the built-in function
D. Our ReplaceAll1 procedure is functionally equivalent to the
built-in ReplaceAll function by relieving a number of shortages
of the second. Based on the ReplaceAll1 procedure a number of
variants of the Df procedure, namely the Df1 and Df2, using a
number of useful methods of programming were programmed.
The Df1 and Df2 procedures in some cases are more useful than
the Df procedure what rather visually illustrate examples given
in [7-12,14]. In addition, the Df, Df1 and Df2 rather significantly
extend the built-in D function.
255
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
The receiving of similar expansion as well for the standard
Integrate function which has rather essential restrictions on use
of arbitrary expressions as integration variables is presented an
quite natural to us. Two variants of such expansion in the form
of the simple procedures Int and Int1 which are based on the
above Subs procedure have been proposed for the set purpose,
whose source codes and examples of application can be found
in [6-16]. Meanwhile, a simple enough Subs1 procedure, being
as a certain extension and complement of the Subs procedure,
can be used for realization of procedures Integrate2 and Diff1
of integration and differentiation accordingly.
In[3331]:= Integrate2[x_, y__] := Module[{a, b, d,
c = Map[Unique["gs"] &, Range[1, Length[{y}]]]},
a = Riffle[{y}, c]; a = If[Length[{y}] == 1, a, Partition[a, 2]];
d = Integrate[Subs1[x, a], Sequences[c]];
{Simplify[Subs1[d, If[ListListQ[a], Map[Reverse, a],
Reverse[a]]]], Map[Remove, c]}[[1]]]
In[3332]:= Integrate2[(a/b + d)/(c/b + h/b), 1/b, d]
Out[3332]= (d*((2*a)/b + d*Log[1/b]))/(2*(c + h))
In[3333]:= Integrate2[Sqrt[a + Sqrt[c + d]*b], Sqrt[c + d]]
Out[3333]= (2*(a + b*Sqrt[c + d])^(3/2))/(3*b)
In[3334]:= Diff1[x_, y__] := Module[{a, b, d,
c = Map[Unique["s"] &, Range[1, Length[{y}]]]},
a = Riffle[{y}, c]; a = If[Length[{y}] == 1, a, Partition[a, 2]];
d = D[Subs1[x, a], Sequences[c]];
{Simplify[Subs1[d, If[ListListQ[a], Map[Reverse, a],
Reverse[a]]]], Map[Remove, c]}[[1]]]
In[3335]:= Diff1[(c + a/b)*Sin[b + 1/x^2], a/b, 1/x^2]
Out[3335]= Cos[b + 1/x^2]
In[3336]:= Diff1[(c + a/b)*Sin[d/c + 1/x^2], 1/c, a/b, 1/x^2]
Out[3336]= –d*Sin[d/c + 1/x^2]
The procedure call Integrate2[x, y] provides integrating of
an expression x on the subexpressions defined by a sequence y.
In addition, the procedure with the returned result by means of
Simplify function performs a sequence of algebraical and other
transformations and returns the simplest form it finds. While
the procedure call Diff1[x, y] which is also realized on a basis of
256
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
the Subs1 returns the differentiation result of an expression x
on the generalized {y, z, g ...} variables which can be as arbitrary
expressions. The result is returned in the simplified form on the
basis of the Simplify function. The above fragment represents
source codes of the Diff1 and Integrate2 procedures along with
examples of their application. The variants of realization of the
means Df ÷ Df2, Diff1, Diff2, Int, Int1, Integrate2, ReplaceAll1,
Subs, Subs1, SubsInExpr and SubsInExpr1 illustrate different
receptions enough useful in a lot of problems of programming
in the Mathematica and, first of all, in problems of the system
character. Moreover, the above means essentially extend the
appropriate system means [7-16].
The previous means, expanding similar built-in tools, at the
same time have certain restrictions. The next means eliminate
the defects inherent in the above and built-in means, being the
most universal in this class for today. As a basis of the following
means is the ToStringRational procedure. The procedure call
ToStringRational[x] returns an expression x in the string format
that is rather convenient for expressions processing, including
replacements of subexpressions, integrating and differentiation
on the subexpressions other than simple symbols. Whereas the
procedure call SubsExpr[x, y] returns the result of substitutions
in an expression x of right parts instead of occurences of left parts
defined by a rule or their list y into the x expression. Fragment
below represents source codes of the above two procedures and
typical examples of their application.
In[7]:= ToStringRational[x_] := Module[{b, c = {}, h, p, t = "", n,
a = "(" <> StringReplace[ToString1[x] <> ")", " " –> ""]},
b = Map[#[[1]] – 1 &, StringPosition[a, "^(–"]];
Do[h = ""; p = SyntaxQ[StringTake[a, {b[[j]]}]];
If[p, Do[h = StringTake[a, {j}];
If[! SyntaxQ[h], AppendTo[c, j + 1]; Break[], 7], {j, b[[j]], 1, –1}],
Do[h = StringTake[a, {j}]; t = h <> t;
If[SyntaxQ[t], AppendTo[c, j]; Break[], 7], {j, b[[j]], 1, –1}]],
{j, 1, Length[b]}]; h = StringInsert[a, "1/", c];
h = StringTake[StringReplace[h, "^(–" –> "^("], {2, –2}];
257
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
h = StringReplace[h, "1/" –> ToString[n] <> "/"];
h = ToString1[ToExpression[h]];
h = StringReplace[h, ToString[n] –> "1"]]
In[8]:= ToStringRational[1/x^2 + 1/(1 + 1/(a + b)^2) + 1/x^3]
Out[8]= "1/(1 + 1/(a + b)^2) + 1/x^3 + 1/x^2"
In[13]:= SubsExpr[x_, y_ /; RuleQ[y] || ListRulesQ[y]] :=
Module[{a = If[RuleQ[y], {y}, y], b = ToStringRational[x], c},
c = Map[Rule[#[[1]], #[[2]]] &, Map[Map[ToStringRational,
{#[[1]], #[[2]]}] &, a]]; ToExpression[StringReplace[b, c]]]
In[14]:= SubsExpr[a*b/x^3 + 1/x^(3/(b[t] + 2)) +
1/f[a + 1/x^3]^2 + 1/(x^2 + m) – 1/x^3, {x^2 –> av, x^3 –> gs}]
Out[14]= –(1/gs) + (a*b)/gs + 1/(av + m) + x^(–(3/(2 + b[t]))) +
1/f[a + 1/gs]^2
Unlike the ToString1 tool the ToStringRational procedure
provides convenient representation of rational expressions in
the string format, that allows to process the expressions more
effectively by means of strings processing tools. The procedures
ToStringRational and SubsExpr, generalizing tools of the same
orientation, meanwhile, don`t belittle them illustrating different
useful enough methods of programming with their advantages
and shortcomings.
At last, the following two procedures Differentiation and
Integrate3 provide the differentiation and integrating on the
variables as which can be subexpressions different from simple
symbols. The call Differentiation[x, y, z, t, …] returns result of
differentiation of an expression x on subexpressions which can
be difer from simple symbols defined by the {y, z, t, …} tuple of
arguments starting from the second. Whereas the procedure
call Integrate3[x, y, z, t, …] returns the result of integraiting of
an expression x on subexpressions that can be difer from simple
symbols defined by the {y, z, t, …} tuple of arguments starting
from the second. It should be noted that the Differentiation and
Integrate3 procedures return the result processed by means of
built-in Simplify function that performs a sequence of algebraic
and other transformations returning the simplest form it finds.
The fragment below represents source codes of the above two
procedures with typical examples of their application.
258
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
In[7]:= Differentiation[x_, y__] := Module[{a = {y}, b = x, c},
c = Map[Unique["g"] &, Range[1, Length[a]]];
Do[b = SubsExpr[b, a[[j]] –> c[[j]]], {j, 1, Length[a]}];
b = D[b, Sequences[c]]; Simplify[SubsExpr[b, Map[c[[#]] –>
a[[#]] &, Range[1, Length[a]]]]]]
In[8]:= Differentiation[1/(1 + 1/x^2 + 1/x^3) + 1/(1 + 1/(a + b +
1/x^3)^2) + 1/(1 + 1/x^3), 1/x^3, x^2]
Out[8]= –((2*x^5)/(1 + x + x^3)^3)
In[15]:= Integrate3[x_, y__] := Module[{a = {y}, b = x, c},
c = Map[Unique["g"] &, Range[1, Length[a]]];
Do[b = SubsExpr[b, a[[j]] –> c[[j]]], {j, 1, Length[a]}];
b = Integrate[b, Sequences[c]];
Simplify[SubsExpr[b, Map[c[[#]] -> a[[#]] &, Range[1, Length[a]]]]]]
In[16]:= Integrate3[1/x^2 + 1/(x^2 + x^3), x^2, x^3]
Out[16]= x^2*(–1 + x*Log[x^2] + (1 + x)*Log[x^2*(1 + x)])
The procedures Diff and Integral1 have certain limitations
that at use demand corresponding wariness; some idea of such
restrictions is illustrated by the following very simple example:
In[2221]:= Diff[(a + b*m)/(c + d*n), a + b, c + d]
Out[2221]= –(m/((c + d)^2*n))
In[2222]:= Integral1[(a + b*m)/(c + d*n), a + b, c + d]
Out[2222]= ((a + b)^2 m*Log[c + d])/(2*n)
For the purpose of an exception of these shortcomings two
modifications of the built–in Replace and ReplaceAll functions
in the form of the procedures Replace4 and ReplaceAll2 have
been programmed accordingly. These procedures expand the
standard means and allow to code the previous two procedures
Integral1 and Diff with wider range of correct applications in
the context of use of the generalized variables of differentiation
and integrating. The call Replace4[x, a –> b] returns the result of
application to an expression x of a substitution a –> b, when as
its left part an arbitrary expression is allowed. At absence in the
x expression of occurrences of the subexpression a an initial x
expression is returned. Unlike previous the call ReplaceAll2[x,r]
returns the result of application to an expression x of a rule r or
consecutive application of rules from the r list; as the left parts
of rules any expressions are allowed.
259
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
Fragment below presents source codes of both procedures
with typical examples of their application.
In[2358]:= Replace4[x_, r_ /; RuleQ[r]] := Module[{a, b, c, h},
{a, b} = {ToString[x // InputForm],
Map[ToString, Map[InputForm, r]]};
c = StringPosition[a, Part[b, 1]];
If[c == {}, x, If[Head[Part[r, 1]] === Plus,
h = Map[If[(#[[1]] === 1 || MemberQ[{" ", "(", "[", "{"},
StringTake[a, {#[[1]] – 1, #[[1]] – 1}]]) && (#[[2]] ===
StringLength[a] || MemberQ[{" ", ")", "]", "}", ","},
StringTake[a, {#[[2]] + 1, #[[2]] + 1}]]), #] &, c],
h = Map[If[(#[[1]] === 1 || ! Quiet[SymbolQ[
StringTake[a, {#[[1]] – 1, #[[1]] – 1}]]]) && (#[[2]] ===
StringLength[a] || ! Quiet[SymbolQ[
StringTake[a, {#[[2]] + 1, #[[2]] + 1}]]]), #] &, c]];
h = Select[h, ! SameQ[#, Null] &];
ToExpression[StringReplacePart[a, "(" <> Part[b, 2] <> ")", h]]]]
In[2359]:= Replace4[(c + d*x)/(c + d + x), c + d –> a + b]
Out[2359]= (c + d*x)/(a + b + x)
In[2360]:= Replace4[Sqrt[a + b*x^2*d + c], x^2 –> a + b]
Out[2360]= Sqrt[a + c + b*(a + b)*d]
In[2364]:= ReplaceAll2[x_, r_ /; RuleQ[r] || ListRulesQ[r]] :=
Module[{a = x, k = 1}, If[RuleQ[r], Replace4[x, r],
While[k <= Length[r], a = Replace4[a, r[[k]]]; k++]; a]]
In[2365]:= ReplaceAll2[Sin[a + b*x^2*d + c*x^2], x^2 –> a + b]
Out[2365]= Sin[a + (a + b)*c + b*(a + b)*d]
On the basis of the Replace4 procedure the procedures Diff
and Integral1 can be expanded in the form of procedures Difff
and Integral2. The procedure call Difff[x,y,z,t,…] returns result
of differentiation of an expression x on the generalized variables
{y, z, t,…} which are any expressions. The result is returned in
the simplified form on a basis of the built–in Simplify function.
While the procedure call Integral2[x, y, z, …] returns the result
of integrating of an expression x on the generalized variables
{y, z, t, …} that are arbitrary expressions. The result is returned
in the simplified form on the basis of the Simplify function. The
fragment below represents the source codes of the above means
260
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
with typical examples of their application.
In[53]:= Difff[x_, y__] := Module[{a = x, a1, a2, a3, c = {}, d, k = 1,
n = g, b = Length[{y}]}, Clear[g];
While[k <= b, d = {y}[[k]]; AppendTo[c, Unique[g]];
a1 = Replace4[a, d –> c[[k]]]; a2 = D[a1, c[[k]]];
a3 = Replace4[a2, c[[k]] –> d]; a = a3; k++]; g = n; Simplify[a3]]
In[54]:= Difff[(a + b)/(c + d + x), a + b, c + d]
Out[54]= –(1/(c + d + x)^2)
In[65]:= Integral2[x_, y__] := Module[{a = x, a1, a2, a3, c = {}, d,
k = 1, n = g, b = Length[{y}]}, Clear[g];
While[k <= b, d = {y}[[k]]; AppendTo[c, Unique[g]];
a1 = Replace4[a, d –> c[[k]]]; a2 = Integrate[a1, c[[k]]];
a3 = Replace4[a2, c[[k]] –> d]; a = a3; k++]; g = n; Simplify[a3]]
In[66]:= Integral2[(a + c + h*g + b*d)/(c + h), c + h, b*d]
Out[66]= 1/2*b*d*(2*a + 2*c + b*d + 2*g*h)*Log[c + h]
Along with the above tools of so-called Replace-group, the
Replace5 function (basing on the built–in InputString function) can
be mentioned, providing wide possibilities on replacement of
subexpressions in expressions in interactive mode. At last, the
Replace6 procedure is intended for replacement of elements of
a list that are located on the set nesting levels and meet certain
conditions [8,16]. The above means are useful in many cases of
processing of algebraic expressions that are based on a set of
rules, including symbolic differentiation and integrating on the
generalized variables that are arbitrary algebraic expressions.
Expressions in strings. The tools that highlight expressions
from strings are of unquestionable interest. Meanwhile, in this
direction, Mathematica has quite limited facilities and we have
programmed a number of facilities of this type [8-16]. Above all,
the procedure call ExprsInStrQ[w, y] returns True, if a string w
contains correct expressions, and False otherwise; while through
the second optional y argument – an indefinite variable – a list of
expressions which are in x is returned. The fragment represents
source code of the ExprsInStrQ procedure along with a typical
example of its application.
261
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
In[77]:= ExprsInStrQ[x_ /; StringQ[x], y___] := Module[{a = {}, d,
c = 1, d, j, b = StringLength[x], k = 1},
For[k = c, k <= b, k++, For[j = k, j <= b, j++,
d = StringTake[x, {k, j}];
If[! SymbolQ[d] && SyntaxQ[d], AppendTo[a, d]]]; c++];
a = Select[Map[StringTrim, Map[StringTrim2[#,
{"–", "+", " "}, 3] &, a]], ExpressionQ[#] &];
If[a == {}, False, If[{y} != {} && ! HowAct[{y}[[1]]],
y = DeleteDuplicates[a]]; True]]
In[78]:= {ExprsInStrQ["a (c + d) – b^2 = Sin[x] h*/+", t], t}
Out[78]= {True, {"a*(c + d)", "a*(c + d) – b", "a*(c + d) – b^2",
"(c + d)", "(c + d) – b", "(c + d) – b^2", "c + d", "d", "b", "b^2",
"2", "Sin[x]", "Sin[x]*h", "in[x]", "in[x]*h", "n[x]", "n[x]*h"}}
In a number of problems of manipulation with expressions,
including differentiation and integrating on the generalized
variables, the question of definition of structure of expression
through subexpressions entering in it including any variables is
topical enough. The given problem is solved by the ExprComp
procedure, whose the call ExprComp[x] returns the list of all
subexpressions composing x expression, while the procedure
call ExprComp[x, z], where the second optional z argument – an
indefined variable – through z additionally returns the nested list
of subexpressions of an arbitrary expression x on nesting levels,
since the first level. Fragment below represents source code of
the ExprComp procedure and an example of its application.
In[7]:= ExprComp[x_, z___] := Module[{a = {x}, b, h = {}, F, q, t=1},
F[y_ /; ListQ[y]] := Module[{c = {}, d, p, k, j = 1},
For[j = 1, j <= Length[y], j++, k = 1;
While[k < Infinity, p = y[[j]];
a = Quiet[Check[Part[p, k], $Failed]];
If[a === $Failed, Break[], If[! SameQ[a, {}], AppendTo[c, a]]];
k++]]; c]; q = F[a];
While[q != {}, AppendTo[h, q]; q = Flatten[Map[F[{#}] &, q]]];
If[{z} != {} && ! HowAct[z],
z = Map[Select[#, ! NumberQ[#] &] &, h]];
Sort[Select[DeleteDuplicates[Flatten[h],
Abs[#1] === Abs[#2] &], ! NumberQ[#] &]]]
262
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
In[8]:= ExprComp[(1/b Cos[a+Sqrt[c+d]])/(Tan[1/b] – 1/c^2), g]
Out[8]= {a, 1/b, b, –(1/c^2), c, d, Sqrt[c + d], c + d, a + Sqrt[c + d],
Cos[a + Sqrt[c + d]], 1/b + Cos[a + Sqrt[c + d]], Tan[1/b],
1/(–(1/c^2) + Tan[1/b]), –(1/c^2) + Tan[1/b]}
In[9]:= g
Out[9]= {{1/b + Cos[a + Sqrt[c + d]], 1/(–(1/c^2) + Tan[1/b])},
{1/b, Cos[a + Sqrt[c + d]], –(1/c^2) + Tan[1/b]}, {b, a + Sqrt[c + d],
–(1/c^2), Tan[1/b]}, {a, Sqrt[c + d], 1/c^2, 1/b}, {c + d, c, b}, {c, d}}
The procedure below is of a certain interest and completes
this chapter. The procedure call FuncToExpr[f, x] returns the
result of applying of a symbol, block, function (including pure
functions) or module f (except the f symbol all remaining admissible
objects shall have arity 1) to each variable (excluding the standard
symbols) of an expression x. While the call FuncToExpr[f, x, y]
with the 3rd optional y argument – a list of symbols – returns the
result of applying of a symbol, block, function (including a pure
function) or a module f (excepting f symbol all remaining admissible
objects shall have arity 1) to each variable (excluding the standard
symbols and symbols from y list) of an expression x. The following
fragment represents source code of the FuncToExpr procedure
along with typical examples of its application.
In[7]:= FuncToExpr[f_ /; SymbolQ[f] || BlockFuncModQ[f] ||
PureFuncQ[f], x_, y___List] := Module[{a = ToString1[x], b, c},
b = ExtrVarsOfStr[a, 2];
b = Select[b, If[{y} == {}, ! SystemQ[#] &, (! SystemQ[#] &&
! MemberQ[Map[ToString, y], #]) &]];
c = Map[# -> ToString[(f)] <> "@@{" <> # <> "}" &, b];
ReplaceAll[x, Map[ToExpressionRule, c]]]
In[8]:= FuncToExpr[f, Sin[m + n]/(x*G[x, y] + S[y, t])]
Out[8]= Sin[f[m] + f[n]]/(f[x] f[G][f[x], f[y]] + f[S][f[y], f[t]])
In[9]:= FuncToExpr[G, {a, b, c, d, 77*Sin[y + 72]}]
Out[9]= {G[a], G[b], G[c], G[d], 77*Sin[72 + G[y]]}
In[10]:= FuncToExpr[f, Sin[m + n]/(x*G[x, y] + S[y, t]), {G, S}]
Out[10]= Sin[f[m] + f[n]]/(f[x]*G[f[x], f[y]] + S[f[y], f[t]])
The means presented in the chapter along with other means
from our package [8,16], extend, sometimes even substantially,
the built–in Mathematica means.
263
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
Chapter 4: Software for input–output in Mathematica
The Mathematica language being the built-in programming
language that first of all is oriented onto symbolic calculations
and processing has rather limited facilities for data processing
that first of all are located in external memory of the computer.
In this regard the language significantly concedes to traditional
programming languages. At the same time, being oriented, first
of all, to solution of tasks in symbolic view, the Mathematica
language provides a set of tools for access to files that can quite
satisfy a wide range of the users of mathematical applications
of the Mathematica. In this chapter the tools of access to files
are considered on rather superficial level owing to the limited
volume, extensiveness of this theme and purpose of the present
book. The reader, interested in tools of access to datafiles of the
Mathematica can appeal to documentation delivered with the
system. At that, for the purpose of development of methods of
access to file system of the computer we programmed a number
of effective tools that are represented in the MathToolBox [16].
Whereas in the present chapter the attention is oriented on the
means which expands standard tools of the Mathematica for
ensuring of work with files of the computer. Some of them are
useful to practical application in Mathematica. Here it is also
appropriate to note that a number of tools of our MathToolBox
package [16] subsequently served as analogues in subsequent
versions of Mathematica; it applies primarily to file access tools.
4.1. Tools of the Mathematica for work with internal files
Means of Math–language provide access of the user to files
of several types that can be conditionally divided into two large
groups, namely: internal and external files. During the routine
work the system deals with three various types of internal files
from which we will note the files having extensions {"nb", "m",
"mx"}, their structure is distinguished by the standard system
tools and that are important enough already on the first stages
of work with system. Before further consideration we will note
264
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
that the concept of file qualifier (FQ) defining the full path to the
required file in file system of the computer or to its subdirectory,
practically, completely coincides with similar concept for Maple
system excepting that if in the Maple for FQ the format of type
{symbol, string} is allowed whereas in the Mathematica for FQ
the string format is admissible only.
The function call Directory[] returns an active directory of
the current session whereas the call SetDirectory[x] returns a x
directory, doing it active in the current session; in addition, as
an active (current) directory is understood the directory whose
datafiles are processed by means of tools of access if only their
names, but not full paths to them are specified. Meanwhile, the
SetDirectory function allows only real–life subdirectories as an
argument, causing on nonexistent subdirectories an erroneous
situation with returning $Failed. On the other hand, the SetDir2
procedure allows to sets the current working directory; at that,
as an argument can be also nonexistent subdirectories even on
inactive I/O devices as the current subdirectories. The fragment
represents source code of the procedure SetDir2 and its use.
In[25]:= SetDir2[x_ /; StringQ[x]] := Module[{a, b, c, t, y},
a = Map[# <> ":" &, Adrive[]];
b = Map[ToUpperCase, StringCases[x, t_ ~~ ":"]];
If[FreeQ[a, b], y = StringReplace[x, b –> a[[1]], 1], y = x];
If[Set[c, Quiet[CreateDirectory[y]]] === $Failed, y,
SetDirectory[c]]]
In[26]:= SetDirectory["F:\\Temp\\Grodno\\77"]
… SetDirectory: Cannot set current directory to
F:\\Temp\\Grodno\\77.
Out[26]= $Failed
In[27]:= SetDir2["F:\\Temp\\Grodno\\77"]
Out[27]= "C:\\Temp\\Grodno\\77"
In[28]:= Adrive[] := Module[{a, b, c, d}, {b, a} = {{},
CharacterRange["A", "Z"]}; Do[d = Directory[]; c = a[[k]];
AppendTo[b, If[Quiet[SetDirectory[c <> ":\\"]] === $Failed,
Nothing, SetDirectory[d]; c]], {k, 1, Length[a]}]; Sort[b]]
265
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
In[29]:= Adrive[]
Out[29]= {"C", "D", "E", "F", "G"}
The SetDir2 procedure essentially uses a procedure whose
call Adrive[] returns the list of the current active I/O devices of
the computer. MathToolBox package [16] provides a number of
means along with their certain modifications (SetDir, SetDir1,
Adrive1, CopyDir, CopyFileToDir, etc.) that use different useful
programming techniques in Mathematica and extending the
built–in file access tools useful from a practical standpoint. At
the same time, it should be borne in mind that for the reason
that the MathToolBox package was developed (truth, with rather
considerable intervals) from 2013 to May 2020, different versions
of the Mathematica system were used, so in number of cases is
necessary to re–debugging some package tools under the current
version of the system. As a rule, this is not particularly difficult.
We programmed a number of rather interesting procedures
for ensuring work with files of the Mathematica Input–format
whose names have extensions {".nb", ".m", ".txt"}, etc. All such
tools are based on analysis of structure of the contents of files
returned by access functions, in particular, ReadFullFile. Some
of them give a possibility to create rather effective user libraries
containing definitions of the Mathematica objects. These and
certain other tools have been implemented as a part of a special
package supporting the releases 8 ÷ 12.1 of Mathematica [16].
Some remarks should be made concerning the system Save
function which saves the objects in a file in the Append mode; in
addition, indefinite symbols in this file are not saved without of
any messages, i.e. the Save call returns Null, i.e. nothing. At the
same time, at saving of procedure or function with a name Avz
in a file by means of the Save in the file all active objects of the
same Avz name in the current session with different headings –
the identifiers of their originality – are saved too. For elimination
of this situation a generalization of the Save function concerning
the saving of Mathematica objects with concrete headings is
offered. The Save1 procedure solves the problem whose source
code with typical examples of its application are represented by
266
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
means of the following fragment.
In[1326]:= Save1[x_String, y_ /; DeleteDuplicates[Map[StringQ,
Flatten[{y}]]][[1]]] := Module[{Rs, t = Flatten[{y}], k = 1},
Rs[n_, m_] := Module[{b, c = ToString[Unique[b]],
a = If[SymbolQ[m], Save[n, m], If[StringFreeQ[m, "["], $Failed,
StringTake[m, {1, Flatten[StringPosition[m, "["]][[1]] – 1}]]]},
If[a === Null, Return[], If[a === $Failed, Return[$Failed],
If[SymbolQ[a], b = DefFunc3[a], Return[$Failed]]]];
If[Length[b] == 1, Save[n, a], b = Select[b, SuffPref[#, m, 1] &]];
If[b != {}, b = c <> b[[1]], Return[$Failed]]; ToExpression[b];
a = c <> a; ToExpression["Save[" <> ToString1[n] <> "," <>
ToString1[a] <> "]"]; BinaryWrite[n, StringReplace[
ToString[StringJoin[Map[FromCharacterCode,
BinaryReadList[n]]]], c –> ""]]; Close[n];];
For[k, k <= Length[t], k++, Rs[x, t[[k]]]]]
In[1327]:= A[x_] := x^2; A[x_, y_] := x+y; A[x_, y_, z_] := x+y+z;
A[x__] := {x}; DefFunc3[A]
Out[1327]= {"A[x_] := x^2", "A[x_, y_] := x + y",
"A[x_, y_, z_] := x + y + z", "A[x__] := {x}"}
In[1328]:= Save1["rans.m", {"A[x_, y_, z_]", "A[x__]"}]
In[1329]:= Clear[A]; << "rans.m"
In[1330]:= DefFunc3[A]
Out[1330]= {"A[x_, y_, z_] := x + y + z", "A[x__] := {x}"}
The call Save1[x, y] saves in a file x the definitions of the
objects defined by the second factual y argument – the name of
an active object in the current session or its heading in string format,
or their combinations in the list format. The Save1 procedure can
be used as built-in Save function, and solving a saving problem
of the chosen objects activated in the current session in the file
differentially on the basis of their headings. A successful call
returns Null, doing the demanded savings; otherwise, $Failed or
unevaluated call are returned. The previous fragment presents
the result of application of the Save1 procedure for a selective
saving of the objects activated in the current session in file. In a
number of cases the procedure Save1 has undoubted interest.
The function call Save2[x, y], where Save2 – a modification
of the Save function, appends to a file x the definitions of the
267
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
means set by a name or by their list y in the format convenient
for subsequent processing by a number of means, particularly,
by the CallSave procedure. Thus, the function is a rather useful
extension of the built–in Save function [7,11-16].
In a number of cases there is an urgent need of saving in a
file of state of the current session with subsequent restoration
by means of loading of the file to the current session different
from the previous session. In this context, SaveCurrentSession
and RestoreCS procedures are useful for saving and restoration
of state of the current session respectively. Thus, the procedure
call SaveCurrentSession[] saves the state of the Mathematica
current session in the m–file "SaveCS.m" with returning of the
name of the target file. Whereas the call SaveCurrentSession[x]
saves the state of the Mathematica current session in a m–file x
with returning of the name of the target x file; in addition, if a x
file has not "m" extension then the extension is added to the x
string. The call RestoreCS[] restores the Mathematica current
session that has been previously stored by means of procedure
SaveCurrentSession in "SaveCS.m" file with returning Null, i.e.
nothing. While the call RestoreCS[x] restores the Mathematica
current session that has been previously stored by means of the
procedure SaveCurrentSession in a m-file x with returning Null.
In absence of the above m-file the procedure call returns $Failed.
The fragment represents source codes of the above procedures
along with typical examples of their application.
In[47]:= SaveCurrentSession[x___String] :=
Module[{a = Names["*"], b = If[{x} == {}, "SaveCS.m",
If[SuffPref[x, ".m", 2], x, x <> ".m"]]}, Save1[b, a]; b]
In[48]:= RestoreCS[x___String] := Module[{a = If[{x} == {},
"SaveCS.m", If[FileExistsQ[x] && FileExtension[x] == "m",
x, $Failed]]}, If[a === $Failed, $Failed, On[General];
Quiet[Get[a]]; Off[General]]]
In[49]:= SaveCurrentSession["C:\\temp\\SaveCS.m"]
Out[49]= "C:\\Temp\\SaveCS.m"
In[50]:= RestoreCS["C:\\Temp\\SaveCS.m"]
268
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
So, the represented means are rather useful in a case when
is required to create copies of the current Mathematica sessions
at certain moments of operating with the system.
4.2. Tools of the Mathematica for work with external files
According to such a quite important indicator as means of
access to files, the Mathematica, in our opinion, possesses a
number of advantages in comparison with Maple. First of all,
Mathematica does automatic processing of hundreds of data
formats and their subformats on the basis of the unified use of
symbolic expressions. For each specific format the correspondence
between internal and external presentation of a format is defined
using the general mechanism of data elements of Mathematica.
For today Mathematica supports many various formats of files
for various purposes, their list can be received by means of the
variables $ImportFormats (the imported files) and $ExportFormats
(the exported files) in quantities 226 and 188 respectively (version
Mathematica 12.1), while the basic formats of files for versions
8–12.1 are considered rather in details in [1-15].
By the function call FileFormat[x] an attempt to define an
input format for a file given by a name x in the string format is
made. In a case of existence for the file x of name extension the
FileFormat function is, as a whole, similar to the FileExtension
function, returning the available extension, except for a case of
packages (m–datafiles) when instead of extension the file type
"Package" is returned. In addition, in certain cases the format
identification is done incorrectly, in particular, the attempt to
test a doc–file without an extension returns "XLS", ascribing it
to the files created by means of Excel 95/97/2000/XP/2003 that
is generally incorrect. The FileFormat function also incorrectly
tests I/O device base directories, for example:
In[3331]:= Map[FileFormat, {"C:/", "C:\\"}]
… General: Further output of General::cdir will be
suppressed during this calculation.
… General: Cannot get deeper in directory tree:
C:\\Documents and Settings.
269
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
… General: Cannot get deeper in directory tree:
C:\\ProgramData\\Application Data.
… General: Cannot get deeper in directory tree:
C:\\ProgramData\\Desktop.
… General: Further output of General::dirdep will be
suppressed during this calculation.
Out[3331]= {"KML", "KML"}
In[3332]:= FileFormat["C:/Temp\\Burthday"]
Out[3332]= "XLS"
In this regard, the procedures FileFormat1 ÷ FileFormat3
have been programmed that extend the capabilities of the builtin FileFormat function and eliminate the above disadvantages.
A version of the FileFormat function attempts to identify file
type without its extension, being based on information of the
creator of file that is contained in the contents of the file. The
FileFormat3 procedure rather accurately identifies datafiles of
the following often used types {DOC, DOCX, PDF, ODT, TXT,
HTML}. In addition, concerning the TXT type the verification of
a datafile is made in the latter case, believing that the datafile of
this type has to consist only of symbols with the decimal codes:
0 ÷ 127 – ASCII symbols
1 ÷ 31
– the control ASCII symbols
32 ÷ 126 – the printed ASCII symbols
97 ÷ 122 – letters of the Latin alphabet in the lower register
129 ÷ 255 – Latin–1 symbols of ISO
192 ÷ 255 – letters of the European languages
The procedure call FileFormat3[x] returns the type of a file
given by a name or a classifier x; in addition, if the datafile has
an extension, it relies as the extension of the datafile. Whereas
the call FileFormat3[x, y] with the second optional argument –
an arbitrary y expression – in a case of file without extension
returns its full name with extension defined for it, at the same
time renaming the x datafile, taking into account the calculated
format. The following fragment represents source code of the
FileFormat3 procedure and the most typical examples of its use.
In[3332]:= FileFormat3[x_ /; FileExistsQ[x], t___] := Module[{b,
c, a = FileExtension[x]}, If[a != "", ToUpperCase[a],
270
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
c = If[Quiet[StringTake[Read[x, String], {1, 5}]] === "%PDF-",
{Close[x], "PDF"}[[-1]], Close[x]; b = ReadFullFile[x];
c = If[! StringFreeQ[b, {"MSWordDoc", "Microsoft Office Word"}], "DOC",
If[! StringFreeQ[b, "docProps"], "DOCX"],
If[! StringFreeQ[b, ".opendocument.textPK"], "ODT",
If[! StringFreeQ[b, {"!DOCTYPE HTML", "text/html"}], "HTML",
If[MemberQ3[Range[0, 255], DeleteDuplicates[Flatten[
Map[ToCharacterCode[#] &, DeleteDuplicates[Characters[b]]]]]],
"TXT", Undefined]]]]];
If[{t} != {}, Quiet[Close[x]]; RenameFile[x, x <> "." <> c], c]]]
In[3333]:= Map[FileFormat2, {"C:/", "C:\\", "E:\\", "E:/",
"C:/Temp", "C:\\Temp"}]
Out[3333]= {"Directory", "Directory", "Directory",
"Directory", "Directory", "Directory"}
In[3334]:= FileFormat3["C:/Temp/Kiri"]
Out[3334]= "DOCX"
In[3335]:= FileFormat3["C:/Temp/Kiri", Agn]
Out[3335]= "C:\\Temp\\Kiri.DOCX"
In[3336]:= Map[FileFormat3, {"C:\\Temp.Burthday",
"c:\\Temp/cinema", "c:/Temp/ransian",
"c:/Temp/Grodno", "c:/Temp/Math_Trials"}]
Out[3336]= {"DOC", "TXT", "HTML", "PDF", "DOCX"}
Now, using the algorithm implemented by FileFormat3 it is
rather simple to modify it for testing of other types of datafiles
whose full names have no extension. That can be rather useful
in the processing problems of datafiles. In a certain relation the
FileFormat3 procedure complements the built–in FileFormat
function along with procedures FileFormat1 and FileFormat2.
The Mathematica provides effective system–independent
access to all aspects of datafiles of any size. At that, the opening
and closing of files the following built-in functions of access are
used: Close, OpenRead, OpenWrite, OpenAppend. Moreover, a
name or full path to a file in the string format acts as a formal
argument of the first three functions; at that, the function call
OpenWrite[] without factual arguments is allowed, opening a
new file located in a subdirectory intended for temporary files
for writing. Whereas the Close function closes a file given by its
271
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
name, full path or a Stream–object. In attempt to close a closed
or nonexistent file the system causes an erroneous situation. For
elimination of such situation, undesirable in many cases, it is
possible to use the simple Closes function doing the closing of
any file including a closed or nonexistent file without output of
any erroneous messages with returning Null, i.e. nothing, but,
perhaps, the name or full path to the closed file:
In[2331]:= Close["C:/Temp/Math/test77.txt"]
…General: C:/Temp/Math/test77.txt is not open.
Out[2331]= Close["C:/Temp/Math/test77.txt"]
In[2332]:= Closes[x_] := Quiet[Check[Close[x], Null]]
In[2333]:= Closes["C:/Temp/Math/test77.txt"]
An object of the following format is understood as a Stream
object of the functions of access such as OpenRead, OpenWrite,
OpenAppend, Read, BinaryWrite,Write, WriteString, etc:
{OutputStream|InputStream}[<File>, <Logical IO channel>]
The function call Streams[] returns the list of Stream objects
of files opened in the current session including system files. For
obtaining the list of all Stream objects of files different from the
system files it is possible to use the function call StreamsU[]:
In[2214]:= StreamsU[] := Streams[][[3 ;; –1]]
In[2215]:= StreamsU[]
Out[2215]= {OutputStream["C:/temp/galina.txt", 3]}
In[2216]:= CloseAll[] := Map[Close, StreamsU[]]
In[2217]:= CloseAll[]; StreamsU[]
Out[2217]= {}
It must be kept in mind that after the termination of work
with an opened file, it remains opened up to its explicit closing
by means of the Close function. For closing of all channels and
files opened in the current session, excepting system files, it is
possible to apply a quite simple CloseAll function, whose call
CloseAll[] closes all open both files and channels with return of
the list of the closed files.
Similar to the Maple the Mathematica also has opportunity
to open the same file on different streams and in various modes,
272
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
using different coding of its name or path by using alternative
registers for letters or/and replacement of "\\" separators of
the subdirectories on "/", and vice versa at opening of files. The
fragment below illustrates application of a similar approach for
opening of the same file on two different channels on reading
with the subsequent alternating reading of records from it.
In[2222]:= g = "C:\\temp\\cinema_2019.txt"; {S, S1} =
{OpenRead[g], OpenRead[If[UpperCaseQ[StringTake[g, 1]],
ToLowerCase[g], ToUpperCase[g]]]}
Out[2222]= {InputStream["C:/temp/cinema_2019.doc", 3],
InputStream["c:\\temp\\cinema_2019.txt", 4]}
In[2223]:= t = {}; For[k = 1, k <= 3, k++,
AppendTo[t, {Read[S], Read[S1]}]]
Out[2223]= {"ran1", "ran1", "ran2", "ran2", "ran3", "ran3"}
Meantime it must be kept in mind that the special attention
at opening of the same file on different channels is necessary
and, above all, at various modes of access to the file in order to
avoid of the possible especial situations, including distortion of
data in a file. Whereas in certain cases this approach at operating
with large enough files can give a quite notable temporal effect
with simplification of certain algorithms of data processing that
are in files. The interesting enough examples of application of
such approach can be found in our books [1-15].
The Mathematica has useful tools for operating with the
pointer defining the current position of scanning of a file. The
following functions provide such work: StreamPosition, Skip,
SetStreamPosition and Find. So, functions StreamPosition and
SetStreamPosition allow to monitor of the current position of
the pointer of an open file and to establish for it a new position
respectively. Moreover, on the closed or nonexistent datafiles
the calls of these functions cause erroneous situations.
Reaction of the Skip function to the status of a file is similar,
whereas the function call Find opens a stream to reading from a
file. The sense of the presented functions is a rather transparent
and in more detail it is possible to familiarize oneself with them,
for instance, in books [12-14]. In connection with these tools the
273
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
question of definition of the status of a file – opened, closed or
doesn't exist – arises. In this regard FileOpenQ procedure can
be as a rather useful tool [16], whose call FileOpenQ[F] returns
the nested list {{R, F, Channel},…} if a F file is open on reading/
writing (R = {"read"|"write"}), F defines actually the F file in the
stylized format (LowerCase + all "\\" are replaced on "/") whereas
Channel defines the logical channel on which the F file in the
mode specified by the first element of the R list was open; if F
file is closed, the empty list is returned, i.e. {}, if F file is absent,
then $Failed is returned. At that, the nested list is used with the
purpose, that the F file can be opened according to syntactically
various file specifiers, for example, "Agn47" and "AGN47", that
allows to do its processing in the various modes simultaneously.
The FileOpenQ1 is a useful extension of FileOpenQ that was
considered above. The call FileOpenQ1[f] returns the nested list
of the format {{R, x, y,...,z}, {{R, x1, y1,...,z1}} if a f file is open for
reading or writing (R = {"in"|"out"}), and f determines the file
in any format (Register + "/" and/or "\\"); if the f file is closed
or is absent, the empty list is returned, i.e. {}. Moreover, sublists
{x, y,...,z} and {x1, y1,...,z1} define files or full paths to them that
are open for reading and writing respectively. Moreover, if in
the current session all user files are closed, except system files,
the call FileOPenQ1[x] on an arbitrary x string returns $Failed.
The files and paths to them are returned in formats which are
determined in the list returned by the function call Streams[],
irrespective of format of f file.
At last, the procedure call FileOpenQ2[x] returns True if a x
file is open, and False otherwise (file is closed or absent). Whereas
the call FileOpenQ2[x, y] also returns True or False depending
on the openness of the file x, returning thru the second optional
argument – a symbol y – the list in the string format of the file
mode of x {"in", "out"} where x file is open for reading ("in") or
writing ("out") accordingly. In addition, the x file can be opened
in both modes at the same time. The fragment below represents
source code of the FileOpenQ2 procedure and the most typical
examples of its application.
274
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
In[2186]:= FileOpenQ2[x_String, y___Symbol] :=
Module[{a, b, c}, a = FileExistsQ[b = Stilized[x]];
If[a, c = Map[Stilized, Map[ToString, Streams[][[3 ;; –1]]]];
c = Select[c, ! StringFreeQ[#, b] &];
c = Map[StringCases[#, ("o" | "i") ~~ __ ~~ "["] &, c];
c = Flatten[Map[StringTrim[#, "["] &, c]];
c = DeleteDuplicates[Map[StringReplace[#,
"putstream" –> ""] &, Flatten[c]]];
If[{y} == {}, If[c != {}, True, False],
If[c == {}, y = c; False, y = c; True]], False]]
In[2197]:= Write["c:\\temp/cinema_2019.doc", 424767];
Read["C:/temp/cinema_2019.doc"];
In[2198]:= FileOpenQ2["C:\\temp\\cinemA_2019.DOC"]
Out[2198]= True
In[2199]:= {FileOpenQ2["c:/temp/cinema_2019.doc", g], g}
Out[2199]= {True, {"in", "out"}}
In[2200]:= Stilized[x_String] :=
ToLowerCase[StringReplace[x, "/" –> "\\"]]
In[2201]:= Stilized["outputstream[C:/Temp/aAa.txt, 3]"]
Out[2201]= "outputstream[c:\\temp\\aaa.txt, 3]"
The fragment also represents a simple Stilized function that
styles an arbitrary character string by replacing all instances of
letters to the lower case and "/" to "\\". The function is used
by the FileOpenQ2 procedure, making it easier to operate with
files that use the same ID in different encoding.
Functions Skip, Find, StreamPosition, SetStreamPosition
provide rather effective means for a rather thin manipulation
with files and in combination with a number of other functions
of access they provide the user with a standard set of functions
for files processing, and give opportunity on their base to create
own tools allowing how to solve specific problems of operating
with files, and in a certain degree to extend standard means of
the system. A number of similar means is presented and in our
books [1-15], and in our MathToolBox package [16]. In addition
to the presented standard operations of files processing, some
275
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
other tools of the package rather significantly facilitates effective
programming of higher level at the solution of many problems
of files processing and management of Mathematica. Naturally,
the consideration rather in details of earlier represented tools of
access to files and the subsequent tools doesn't enter purposes
of the present book therefore we will represent relatively them
only short excursus in the form of brief information along with
some comments on the represented means (see also books on the
Mathematica system in [15]).
Among means of processing, the following functions can
be noted: FileNames – depending on the coding format returns
the list of full paths to the files and/or directories contained in
the given directory onto arbitrary nesting depth in file system
of the computer. Whereas the functions CopyFile, RenameFile,
DeleteFile serve for copying, renaming and removal of the files
accordingly. Except the listed means for work with datafiles the
Mathematica has a number of rather useful functions that here
aren't considered however with them the reader can familiarize
in reference base of the Mathematica or in the corresponding
literature [8]. Along with the above functions OpenRead, Read,
OpenWrite, Read, Write, Skip and Streams of the lowest level of
access to files, the functions Get, Put, Export, Import, ReadList,
BinaryReadList, BinaryWrite, BinaryRead are too important in
problems of access to files which support operations of reading
and writing of data of the required formats. With these means
along with a number of quite interesting examples and features
of their use, at last with certain critical remarks to their address
the reader can familiarize in [1-15]. Meanwhile, these means of
access together with the considered means and tools remaining
without our attention form a rather developed basis of effective
processing of files of various formats.
On the other hand, along with actually processing of the
internal contents of files, Mathematica has a number of means
for search of files, their testing, work with their names, etc. We
will list only some of them, namely: FindFile, FileNameDepth,
FileExistsQ, FileBaseName, FileNameSplit, ExpandFileName,
276
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
FileNameJoin, FileNameTake. With the these means along with
a number of interesting enough examples and features of their
use, at last with critical remarks to their address the reader can
familiarize oneself in our books [1-15].
In particular, as it was noted earlier [1-15], the FileExistsQ
function like certain other functions of access during the search
is limited only to the directories defined in the predetermined
$Path variable. For the purpose of elimination of the deficiency
a rather simple FileExistsQ1 procedure has been offered. The
following fragment represents source code of the FileExistsQ1
procedure along with a typical example of its application.
In[2226]:= FileExistsQ1[x__ /; StringQ[{x}[[1]]]] :=
Module[{b = {x}, a = SearchFile[{x}[[1]]]},
If[a == {}, False, If[Length[b] == 2 && ! HowAct[b[[2]]],
ToExpression[ToString[b[[2]]] <> " = " <> ToString1[a]], 1]; True]]
In[2227]:= FileExistsQ1["Book_2020.doc", t42]
Out[2227]= True
In[2228]:= t42
Out[2228]= {"C:\\Mathematica\\Book_2020.doc",
"E:\\Mathematica\\Book_2020.doc"}
The procedure call FileExistsQ1[x] returns True if x defines
a real datafile in system of directories of the computer and False
otherwise; whereas the call FileExistsQ1[x, y], in addition thru
the second actual argument – an indefinite variable – returns the
list of full paths to the found datafile x if the basic result of the
call is True. That procedure substantially uses the procedure
SearchFile, whose call SearchFile[F] returns the list containing
full paths to a datafile F found in file system of the computer; if
the datafile F has not been found, the empty list is returned. We
will note, the procedure SearchFile uses the Run function that
is used by a number of tools of our MathToolBox package [16].
The following fragment presents source code of the SearchFile
procedure along with a typical example of its application.
In[2322]:= SearchFile[F_ /; StringQ[F]] :=
Module[{a, b, f, dir, h = Stilized[F], k},
{a, b, f} = {Map[ToUpperCase[#] <> ":\\" &, Adrive[]], {}, "###.txt"};
277
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
dir[y_ /; StringQ[y]] := Module[{a, b, c, v},
Run["Dir " <> "/A/B/S " <> y <> " > " <> f];
c = {}; Label[b]; a = Stilized[ToString[v = Read[f, String]]];
If[a == "endoffile", Close[f]; DeleteFile[f]; Return[c],
If[SuffPref[a, h, 2], If[FileExistsQ[v], AppendTo[c, v]];
Goto[b], Goto[b]]]];
For[k = 1, k <= Length[a], k++, AppendTo[b, dir[a[[k]]]]]; Flatten[b]]
In[2323]:= SearchFile["Book_2020.doc"]
Out[2323]= {"C:\\Mathematica\\Book_2020.doc",
"E:\\Mathematica\\Book_2020.doc"}
The SearchFile1 procedure is a functional analogue of the
above SearchFile procedure. Unlike the previous procedure the
SearchFile1 seeks out a file in three stages: (1) if the required file
is set by a full path only existence of the concrete file is checked,
at detection the full path to it is returned, (2) search is done in
the list of directories determined by the predetermined $Path
variable, (3) a search is done within file system of the computer.
Note, that speed of both procedures essentially depends on the
sizes of file system of the computer, first of all, if a required file
isn't defined by the full path and isn't in the directories defined
by the $Path variable. In addition, in this case the search is done
if possible even in directory "c:\\$recycle.bin" of the Windows 7.
Along with tools of processing of external files the system
has also the set of useful enough means for manipulation with
directories of the Mathematica, and file system of the computer
in general. We will list only some of these important functions:
DirectoryQ[j] – the call returns True if a j string determines an
existing directory, and False otherwise; unfortunately, the standard
function at coding "/" at the end of j string returns False irrespective
of existence of the tested directory; a quite simple DirQ procedure [8]
eliminates that defect of the standard function;
DirectoryName[d] – the call returns the path to a directory that
contains a d file; if d is a real subdirectory then chain of subdirectories
to it is returned; in addition, taking into account the file concept that
identifies files and subdirectories, and the circumstance that the call
DirectoryName[d] doesn't consider actual existence of d, the similar
278
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
approach in a certain measure could be considered justified, however
on condition of taking into account of reality of the tested d path such
approach causes certain questions. Therefore, from this standpoint a
rather simple DirName procedure [6] which returns "None" if d is a
subdirectory, the path to a subdirectory containing d file, and $Failed
otherwise is offered. At that, the search is done within full file system
of the computer, but only not within system of subdirectories defined
by means of the predetermined $Path variable;
CreateDirectory[d] – the call creates the given d directory with
return of the path to it; meanwhile, such means doesn't work in a case
of designation of the nonexistent device of external memory (flash card,
disk, etc.) therefore we created a rather simple CDir procedure [7] that
resolves this problem: the procedure call CDir[d] creates the given d
directory with return of the full path to it; in the absence or inactivity
of the device of external memory the directory is created on a device
from the list of all active devices of external memory that has maximal
volume of available memory with returning of the full path to it;
CopyDirectory[j1, j2] – the call completely copies a j1 directory
into a j2 directory, but in the presence of the accepting j2 directory the
call CopyDirectory[j1, j2] causes an erroneous situation with return
of $Failed that in a number of cases is undesirable. For the purpose of
elimination of such situation a rather simple CopyDir procedure can
be offered, which in general is similar to the standard CopyDirectory
function, but with the difference that in the presence of the accepting
j2 directory the j1 directory is copied as a subdirectory of the j2 with
returning of the full path to it;
DeleteDirectory[d] – the function call deletes from file system of
the computer the given d directory with returning Null, i.e. nothing,
regardless of attributes of the directory (Archive, Read–only, Hidden,
and System). Meanwhile, such approach, in our opinion, is not quite
justified, relying only on the circumstance that the user is precisely
sure what he does. While in general there has to be an insurance from
removal, in particular, of files and directories having such attributes
as read-only (R), hidden (H) and system (S). To this end, particularly,
it is possible before removing of an element of file system to previously
check up its attributes what the useful Attrib procedure considered in
the following section provides.
279
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
4.3. Tools of Mathematica for attributes processing of
directories and datafiles
The Mathematica has no tools of operating with attributes
of files and directories what, in our opinion, is a rather essential
shortcoming at creation on its basis of various data processing
systems. By the way, the similar means are absent in the Maple
also, therefore we created for it a set of procedures {Atr, F_atr,
F_atr1, F_atr2} that have solved this problem [41]. These tools
presented below solve this problem for the Mathematica. The
fragment below represents the Attrib procedure that provides
processing of attributes of files and directories.
In[3327]:= Attrib[F_ /; StringQ[F], x_ /; ListQ[x] &&
AllTrue[Map3[MemberQ, {"–A", "–H", "–S", "–R", "+A", "+H",
"+S", "+R"}, x], TrueQ] || x == {} || x == "Attr"] :=
Module[{a, b = "attrib ", c, d = " > ", h = "attrib.exe", p, f, g, t, v},
a = ToString[v = Unique["ArtKr"]];
If[Set[t, LoadExtProg["attrib.exe"]] === $Failed,
Return[$Failed], Null];
If[StringLength[F] == 3 && DirQ[F] &&
StringTake[F, {2, 2}] == ":", Return["Drive " <> F],
If[StringLength[F] == 3 && DirQ[F], f = StandPath[F],
If[FileExistsQ1[StrDelEnds[F, "\\", 2], v], g = v;
f = StandPath[g[[1]]]; Clear[v], Return["<" <> F <> "> is not a
directory or a datafile"]]]];
If[x === "Attr", Run[b <> f <> d <> a],
If[x === {}, Run[b <> " –A –H –S –R " <> f <> d <> a],
Run[b <> StringReplace[StringJoin[x], {"+" –> " +",
"–" –> " –"}] <> " " <> f <> d <> a]]];
If[FileByteCount[a] == 0, Return[DeleteFile[a]],
d = Read[a, String]; DeleteFile[Close[a]]];
h = StringSplit[StringTrim[StringTake[d, {1, StringLength[d] –
StringLength[f]}]]]; Quiet[DeleteFile[t]];
h = Flatten[h /. {"HR" -> {"H", "R"}, "SH" –> {"S", "H"},
"SHR" –> {"S", "H", "R"}, "SRH" –> {"S", "R", "H"},
"HSR" –> {"H", "S", "R"}, "HRS" –> {"H", "R", "S"},
"RSH" –> {"R", "S", "H"}, "RHS" –> {"R", "H", "S"}}];
If[h === {"File", "not", "found", "–"} ||
MemberQ[h, "C:\\Documents"], "Drive " <> f, {h, g[[1]]}]]
280
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
In[3328]:= Attrib["C:\\Mathematica", "Attr"]
Out[3328]= {{}, "C:\\Mathematica"}
In[3329]:= Attrib["c:/temp\\", {"+A", "+R"}]
In[3330]:= Attrib["c:/temp\\", "Attr"]
Out[3330]= {{"A", "R"}, "C:\\Temp"}
In[3331]:= Attrib["c:/temp\\", {"–R"}]
In[3332]:= Attrib["c:/temp\\", "Attr"]
Out[3332]= {{"A"}, "C:\\Temp"}
The successful procedure call Attrib[w, "Attr"] returns the
list of attributes of a file or directory w in the context Archive
("A"), Read–only ("R"), Hidden ("H") and System ("S"). At that,
also other attributes inherent to the system files and directories
are possible; in particular, on the main directories of devices of
external memory "Drive w" whereas on a nonexistent directory
or file the message "w isn't a directory or file" is returned. At
that, the call is returned in the form of list of the format {x, y, …,
z, Pt} where the last element determines a full path to a file or
directory w; the files and subdirectories of the same name can be
in various directories, however processing of attributes is made
only concerning the first file/directory from the list of objects of
the same name. If the full path to a file or directory w is defined
as the first argument of the Attrib procedure, only this object is
processed. The elements of the returned list that precede its last
element define attributes of a processed file or directory.
The procedure call Attrib[w, {}] returns Null, i.e. nothing,
cancelling all attributes for a processed file or directory w while
∈{"-A","-H","-S",
the call Attrib[w, {"x","y",…,"z"}] where x,y,z∈
"–R", "+A", "+H", "+S", "+R"}, also returns Null, i.e. nothing,
setting/cancelling the attributes of the processed directory or
file w determined by the second argument. At impossibility to
execute processing of attributes the call Attrib[w, x] returns the
corresponding messages. Procedure Attrib allows to carry out
processing of attributes of a file or a directory that is located in
any place of file system of the computer. The Attrib procedure
is represented to us as a rather useful means for operating with
file system of the computer.
281
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
In turn, the Attrib1 procedure in many respects is similar to
the Attrib procedure both in the functional, and in descriptive
relation, but the Attrib1 procedure has also certain differences.
The successful procedure call Attrib1[w, "Attr"] returns the list
of attributes in the string format of a directory or a file w in the
context Archive ("A"), Hidden ("H"), System ("S"), Read–only ("R").
The call Attrib1[w, {}] returns Null, cancelling all attributes for
the processed file/directory w whereas the call Attrib1[w, {"x",
"y",…,"z"}] where x, y, z∈
∈{"–A", "–H", "–S", "–R", "+A", "+H",
"+S", "+R"}, also returns Null, i.e. nothing, setting/cancelling
the attributes of the processed file or directory w defined by the
second argument, whereas the call Attrib1[w, x, y] with the 3rd
optional y argument – any expression – in addition deletes the
program file "attrib.exe" from the directory determined by the
call Directory[]. The source code of the Attrib1 procedure with
the most typical examples of its use can be found in [8,10,16].
At the same time, the possible message "cmd.exe – Corrupt
File" that arises at operating of the above procedures Attrib and
Attrib1 should be ignored. Both procedures essentially use our
procedures LoadExtProg, StrDelEnds, StandPath, FileExistsQ1
and DirQ along with use of the standard Run function and the
Attrib command of the MS DOS. In addition, the possibility of
removal of the "attrib.exe" program file from the directory that
is determined by the call Directory[] after the call of the Attrib1
leaves the Mathematica unchanged. So, in implementation of
both procedures the Run function was enough essentially used,
which has the following coding format:
Run[s1,…,sn] – in the basic operational system (for example,
MS DOS) executes a command that is formed from expressions
sj (j=1..n) that are parted by blank symbols with return of code
of success of the command completion in the form of an integer.
As a rule, the Run function does not demand of an interactive
input, however on some operational platforms it generates text
messages. In [1-15] rather interesting examples of application of
the Run function at programming in the Mathematica with the
MS DOS commands are represented.
282
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
Note that use of the Run function illustrates one of a rather
useful methods of interface with the basic operational platform,
but here two very essential moments take place. Above all, the
Run function on some operational platforms (e.g., Windows XP
Professional) demands certain external reaction of the user at an
exit from the Mathematica into the operational platform, and
secondly, the call by means of the Run function of functions or
MS DOS commands assumes their existence in the directories
system determined by the $Path variable since, otherwise the
Mathematica doesn't recognize them.
For instance, similar situation takes place in the case of use
of the external DOS commands, for this reason in realization of
the procedures Attrib, Attrib1 which through the Run use the
external command "attrib" of DOS, the connection to system of
directories of $Path of the directories containing the "attrib.exe"
utility has been provided whereas for internal commands of the
DOS it isn't required. Once again, possible messages "cmd.exe –
Corrupt File" which can arise at execution of the Run function
should be ignored.
Thus, at using of the internal command Dir of MS DOS of
an extension of the list of directories defined by the $Path is not
required. At the same time, on the basis of standard reception
on the basis of extension of a list defined by the $Path variable
the Mathematica doesn't recognize the external commands of
MS DOS. In this regard we programmed procedure whose call
LoadExtProg[x] provides search in file system of the computer
of a program x set by the full name with its subsequent copying
into a directory defined by the call Directory[]. The procedure
call LoadExtProg[x] searches out x datafile in file system of the
computer and copies it to the directory determined by the call
Directory[], returning Directory[] <> "\\" <> x if the file already
was in this directory or has been copied into this directory.
The first directory containing the found x file supplements
the list of the directories defined by the predetermined $Path
variable. Whereas the procedure call LoadExtProg[x, y] with the
second optional y argument – an undefinite variable – in addition
283
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
through y returns the list of all full paths to the found x datafile
without a modification of the directories list determined by the
predetermined $Path variable. In case of absence of a possibility
to find the required x file $Failed is returned. The next fragment
presents source code of the LoadExtProg procedure along with
an example of its application, in particular, for loading into the
directory determined by the call Directory[] of a copy of external
command "attrib.exe" of MS DOS with check of the result.
In[2232]:= LoadExtProg[x_ /; StringQ[x], y___] :=
Module[{a = Directory[], b = Unique["agn"], c, d, h},
If[PathToFileQ[x] && FileExistsQ[x],
CopyFileToDir[x, Directory[]], If[PathToFileQ[x] &&
! FileExistsQ[x], $Failed, d = a <> "\\" <> x;
If[FileExistsQ[d], d, h = FileExistsQ1[x, b];
If[h, CopyFileToDir[b[[1]], a];
If[{y} == {}, AppendTo[$Path, FileNameJoin[
FileNameSplit[ b[[1]]][[1 ;; –2]]]], y = b]; d, $Failed]]]]]
In[2233]:= LoadExtProg["C:\\attrib.exe"]
Out[2233]= $Failed
In[2234]:= LoadExtProg["attrib.exe"]
Out[2234]= "c:\\users\\aladjev\\documents\\attrib.exe"
In[2235]:= FileExistsQ[Directory[] <> "\\" <> "attrib.exe"]
Out[2235]= True
In[2236]:= Attrib1["c:\\Mathem\\book_2020.doc", "Attr"]
Out[2236]= {"A", "S", "R"}
Therefore, in advance by means of the call LoadExtProg[x]
it is possible to provide access to a necessary x file if of course it
exists in file system of the computer. So, using the LoadExtProg
in total with the system Run function, it is possible to execute a
number of very useful {.exe|.com} programs in the Mathematica
software – the programs of different purpose that are absent in
file system of the Mathematica thereby significantly extending
the functionality of Mathematica that is demanded by a rather
wide range of various appendices.
The above LoadExtProg and FileExistsQ1 procedures use
the CopyFileToDir procedure whose call CopyFileToDir[x, y]
provides copying of a file or directory x into a y directory with
284
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
return of the full path to the copied file/directory. If the copied
file already exists, it isn't updated if the target directory already
exists, the x directory is copied into its subdirectory of the same
name. The fragment presents source code of the CopyFileToDir
procedure with typical examples of its application:
In[5]:= CopyFileToDir[x_ /; PathToFileQ[x], y_ /; DirQ[y]] :=
Module[{a, b}, If[DirQ[x], CopyDir[x, y], If[FileExistsQ[x],
a = FileNameSplit[x][[–1]];
If[FileExistsQ[b = y <> "\\" <> a], b, CopyFile[x, b]], $Failed]]]
In[6]:= CopyFileToDir["c:/math/book_2020.doc", Directory[]]
Out[6]= "C:\\Users\\Aladjev\\Documents\\book_2020.doc"
In[7]:= CopyFileToDir["C:\\Temp", "E:\\Temp"]
Out[7]= "E:\\Temp\\Temp"
The CopyFileToDir procedure has a variety of appendices in
processing problems of file system of the computer.
In conclusion of the section an useful enough procedure is
represented which provides only two functions – (1) obtaining
of the list of attributes ascribed to a file or directory, and (2) the
removal of all ascribed attributes. The call Attribs[x] returns the
list of attributes in string format which are ascribed to a file or a
directory x. On the main directories of volumes of direct access
the procedure call Attribs returns $Failed, while the procedure
call Attribs[x, y] with the 2nd optional y argument – an arbitrary
expression – deletes all attributes which are ascribed to a file or a
directory x with returning 0 at a successful call. The following
fragment represents source code of the Attribs procedure with
the most typical examples of its application:
In[3330]:= Attribs[x_ /; FileExistsQ[x] || DirectoryQ[x], y___] :=
Module[{b, a = StandPath[x], d = ToString[Unique["g"]],
c = "attrib.exe", g},
If[DirQ[x] && StringLength[x] == 3 &&
StringTake[x, {2, 2}] == ":", $Failed,
g[] := Quiet[DeleteFile[Directory[] <> "\\" <> c]];
If[! FileExistsQ[c], LoadExtProg[c]];
If[{y} == {}, Run[c <> " " <> a <> " > ", d]; g[];
b = Characters[StringReplace[StringTake[Read[d, String],
{1, –StringLength[a] – 1}], " " –> ""]]; DeleteFile[Close[d]]; b,
285
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
a = Run[c <> " –A –H –R –S " <> a]; g[]; a]]]
In[3331]:= Map[Attribs, {"c:\\", "e:/", "c:/tm", "c:/tm/bu.doc"}]
Out[3331]= {$Failed, $Failed, {"A"}, {"A", "R", "S"}}
In[3332]:= Attribs["c:/tm/bu.doc", 77]
Out[3332]= 0
In[3333]:= Attribs["c:/tm/bu.doc"]
Out[3333]= {}
Note, that as x argument the usage of an existing file, full
path to a file or a directory is supposed. At the same time, the
file "attrib.exe" is removed from the directory defined by the
call Directory[] after a procedure call. The Attribs procedure is
rather fast–acting, supplementing procedures Attrib, Attrib1.
The Attribs procedure is effectively applied in programming of
means of access to elements of file system of the computer at
processing their attributes. Thus, it should be noted once again
that the Mathematica has no means for processing of attributes
of files and directories therefore the offered procedures Attrib,
Attrib1 and Attribs in a certain measure fill this niche.
So, the declared possibility of extension of the Mathematica
directories that is determined by the $Path variable, generally
doesn't operate already concerning the external commands of
MS DOS what well illustrates both consideration of the above
procedures Attrib, LoadExtProg and Attrib1, and an example
with the external "tasklist" command which is provided display
of all active processes of the current session with Windows 7:
In[2565]:= Run["tasklist", " > ", "C:\\Temp\\tasklist.txt"]
Out[2565]= 1
In[2566]:= LoadExtProg["tasklist.exe"];
Run["tasklist" <> " > " <> "C:\\Temp\\tasklist.txt"]
Out[2566]= 0
: System Idle Process
:0
: Services
:0
===============
: Skype.exe
: 2396
286
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
: Console
:1
===============
: Mathematica.exe
: 4120
: Console
:1
: WolframKernel.exe
: 5888
: Console
:1
===============
The first example of the previous fragment illustrates that
attempt by means of the Run to execute the external command
"tasklist" of DOS completes unsuccessfully (return code 1), while
result of the call LoadExtProg["tasklist.exe"] with search and
upload into the directory defined by the call Directory[] of the
"tasklist.exe" file, allows to successfully execute by means of the
Run function the external command "tasklist" with preserving
of result of its performance in file of txt-format whose contents
is represented by the shaded area. Meanwhile, use of external
software on the basis of the Run function along with possibility
of extension of functionality of the Mathematica causes a rather
serious portability question. So, the means developed by means
of this method with use of the external commands of MS DOS
are subject to influence of variability of the commands of DOS
depending on version of basic operating system. In a number of
cases it demands a certain adaptation of the software according
to the basic operating system.
4.4. Additional tools for files and directories processing of file
system of the computer
This item presents tools of files and directories processing
of file system of the computer which supplement and in certain
cases also extend the above means. Unlike the DeleteDirectory
and DeleteFile functions the DelDirFile1 procedure removes a
directory or file from file system of the computer.
287
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
Similarly to functions DeleteFile and DeleteDirectory, the
call DelDirFile[w] removes from file system of the computer a
file or directory w, returning Null, i.e. nothing. Whereas the call
DelDirFile[w, y] with the 2nd optional argument y – an arbitrary
expression – removes from file system of the computer a file or a
directory w, irrespectively from existence of attribute Read–only
for it. The DelDirFile1 procedure is a rather useful extension of
the DelDirFile procedure [2] on a case of open files in addition
to the Read–only attribute of both the separate files, and the files
being in the deleted directory. The procedure call DelDirFile1[x]
is equivalent to the call DelDirFile[w, y], providing removal of
a file or directory x irrespective of openness of a separate w file
and the Read–only attribute ascribed to it, or existence of similar
files in w directory. The fragment represents source code of the
DelDirFile1 procedure along with typical examples of its use.
In[2242]:= DelDirFile1[x_ /; StringQ[x] && FileExistsQ[x] ||
DirQ[x] && If[StringLength[x] == 3 &&
StringTake[x, {2, 2}] == ":", False, True]] :=
Module[{a = {}, b = "", c = Stilized[x], d, f = "#$#", k = 1},
If[DirQ[x], Run["Dir " <> c <> " /A/B/OG/S > " <> f]; Attribs[c, 7];
For[k, k < Infinity, k++, b = Read[f, String];
If[SameQ[b, EndOfFile], DeleteFile[Close[f]]; Break[],
Attribs[b, 7]; Close2[b]]];
DeleteDirectory[x, DeleteContents –> True], Close2[x];
Attribs[x, 7]; DeleteFile[x]]]
In[2243]:= Attribs["c:\\temp\\paper_201119.docx"]
Out[2243]= {"A", "S", "H", "R"}
In[2244]:= DelDirFile1["c:\\temp\\paper_201119.docx"]
In[2245]:= FileExistsQ["c:\\temp\\paper_201119.docx"]
Out[2245]= False
In[2246]:= DirectoryQ["c:\\temp\\Rans_IAN"]
Out[2246]= True
In[2247]:= Attribs["c:\\temp\\Rans_IAN"]
Out[2247]= {"A", "S", "H", "R"}
In[2248]:= DelDirFile1["c:\\temp\\Rans_IAN"]
In[2249]:= DirectoryQ["c:\\temp\\Rans_IAN"]
Out[2249]= False
288
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
Meanwhile, before representation of the following means it
is expedient to determine one a rather useful procedure whose
essence is as follows. As noted above, the file qualifier depends
both on register of symbols, and the used dividers of directories.
So, the same file with different qualifiers "c:\\Tmp\\cinem.txt"
and "c:/tmp/cinem.txt" opens in 2 various streams. Therefore
its closing by means of the built-in Close function doesn't close
the "cinem.txt" file, demanding closing of all streams on which
it was earlier open. For solution of this problem the Close1 and
Close2 procedures have been programmed.
In[3]:= Read["C:/Temp\\paper_201119.docx"];
Read["C:/Temp/paper_201119.docx"];
Read["C:/Temp\\Paper_201119.docx"];
Read["c:/temp/paper_201119.Docx"]; StreamsU[]
Out[3]= {InputStream["C:/Temp\\paper_201119.docx", 3],
InputStream["C:/Temp/paper_201119.docx", 4],
InputStream["C:/Temp\\Paper_201119.docx", 5],
InputStream["c:/temp/paper_201119.Docx", 6]}
In[4]:= Close["C:\\Temp\\paper_201119.docx"]
…General: C:\Temp\paper_201119.docx is not open.
Out[4]= Close["C:\\Temp\\paper_201119.docx"]
In[5]:= StreamsU[]
Out[5]= {InputStream["C:/Temp\\paper_201119.docx", 3],
InputStream["C:/Temp/paper_201119.docx", 4],
InputStream["C:/Temp\\Paper_201119.docx", 5],
InputStream["c:/temp/paper_201119.Docx", 6]}
In[5]:= Close1[x___String] := Module[{a = Streams[][[3 ;; –1]],
b = {x}, c = {}, k = 1, j},
If[a == {} || b == {}, {}, b = Select[{x}, FileExistsQ[#] &];
While[k <= Length[a], j = 1; While[j <= Length[b],
If[Stilized[a[[k]][[1]]] == Stilized[b[[j]]],
AppendTo[c, a[[k]]]]; j++]; k++];
Map[Close, c]; If[Length[b] == 1, b[[1]], b]]]
In[7]:= Close1["C:\\Temp\paper_201119.docx"]
Out[7]= "C:\\Temp\\paper_201119.docx"
In[13]:= StreamsU[]
Out[13]= {}
289
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
In[21]:= Close2[x___String] := Module[{a = Streams[][[3 ;; –1]],
b = {}, c, d = Select[{x}, StringQ[#] &]},
If[d == {}, {}, c[y_] := Stilized[y];
Map[AppendTo[b, Part[#, 1]] &, a];
d = DeleteDuplicates[Map[c[#] &, d]];
Map[Close, Select[b, MemberQ[d, c[#]] &]]]]
In[22]:= Close["C:\\Temp\\paper_201119.docx"]
…General: C:\Temp\paper_201119.docx is not open.
Out[22]= Close["C:\\Temp\\paper_201119.docx"]
In[23]:= Close2["C:\\Temp\\paper_201119.docx"]
Out[23]= {"C:/Temp\\paper_201119.docx",
"C:/Temp/paper_201119.docx",
"C:/Temp\\Paper_201119.docx",
"c:/temp/paper_201119.Docx"}
In[24]:= StreamsU[]
Out[24]= {}
The call Close1[x, y, z, …] closes all off really–existing files
in a {x, y, z, …} list irrespective of quantity of streams on which
they have been opened by means of various files qualifiers with
returning their list. In other cases the call on admissible factual
arguments returns the empty list, while on inadmissible factual
arguments a call is returned unevaluated. The procedure Close2
is a functional analogue of the above procedure Close1. The call
Close2[x, y, z,…] closes all off really–existing files in a {x, y, z,…}
list irrespective of quantity of streams on which they have been
opened by various files qualifiers with returning their list. The
call on any admissible factual arguments returns the empty list,
whereas on inadmissible actual arguments the call is returned
unevaluated. The previous fragment represents source codes of
both procedures along with examples of their use. In a number
of appendices Close1 and Close2 are quite useful means.
The tools representing a quite certain interest at operating
with file system of the computer as independently and as a part
of tools of files processing and directories complete the section.
They are used and by a number of means of our MathToolBox
package [16]. In particular, at operating with files the OpenFiles
290
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
procedure can be rather useful, whose call OpenFiles[] returns
the two–element nested list, whose the first sublist with the 1st
"read" element contains full paths to the files opened on reading
whereas the 2nd sublist with the first "write" element contains
full paths to files opened on writing in the current session. In a
case of absence of such files the call returns the empty list, i.e. {}.
Whereas the call OpenFiles[x] with one factual x argument – a
file classifier – returns the result of the above format relative to
an open x file irrespective of a format of coding of its qualifier.
If x defines a closed or a nonexistent file then the procedure call
returns the empty list, i.e. {}. The following fragment represents
source code of the procedure with a typical example of its use.
In[333]:= OpenFiles[x___String] := Module[{a = StreamsU[],
b, c, d, h1 = {"read"}, h2 = {"write"}},
If[a == {}, {}, d = Map[{Part[#, 0], Part[#, 1]} &, a];
b = Select[d, #[[1]] == InputStream &];
c = Select[d, #[[1]] == OutputStream &];
b = Map[DeleteDuplicates,
Map[Flatten, Gather[Join[b, c], #1[[1]] == #2[[1]] &]]];
b = Map[Flatten, Map[If[SameQ[#[[1]], InputStream],
AppendTo[h1, #[[2 ;; –1]]], AppendTo[h2, #[[2 ;; –1]]]] &, b]];
If[{x} == {}, b, If[SameQ[FileExistsQ[x], True], c = Map[Flatten,
Map[{#[[1]], Select[#, Stilized[#] === Stilized[x] &]} &, b]];
If[c == {{"read"}, {"write"}}, {}, c = Select[c, Length[#] > 1 &];
If[Length[c] > 1, c, c[[1]]], {}]]]]]
In[334]:= Write["c:/temp\\paper_201119.docx", 211119];
Read["C:/Temp/paper_201119.docx"];
In[335]:= OpenFiles["C:\\temp\\paper_201119.docx"]
Out[335]= {{"read", "C:/Temp/paper_201119.docx"},
{"write", "c:/temp\\paper_201119.docx"}}
As a procedure similar to the OpenFiles, the procedure can
be used, whose call StreamFiles[] returns the nested list from 2
sublists, the first sublist with the first "in" element contains full
paths/names of the files opened on the reading whereas the 2nd
sublist with the first "out" element contains full paths/names of
the files opened on the recording. Whereas in the absence of the
open files the call StreamFiles[] returns "AllFilesClosed".
291
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
In[2336]:= StreamFiles[]
Out[2336]= {{"in", "C:/Temp/paper_201119.docx"},
{"out", "c:/temp\\paper_201119.docx"}}
In[2337]:= CloseAll[]; StreamFiles[]
Out[2337]= "AllFilesClosed"
The following procedure is represented as a rather useful
tool at operating with file system of the computer, whose call
DirEmptyQ[w] returns True if w directory is empty, otherwise
False is returned. At that, the procedure call DirEmptyQ[w] is
returned unevaluated, if w isn't a real directory. At the same
time, the call DirEmptyQ[w, y] with optional argument y – an
indefinite variable – through y returns the contents of w directory
in format of Dir command of MS DOS. The following fragment
presents source code of the DirEmptyQ procedure with typical
enough examples of its application.
In[3128]:= DirEmptyQ[d_ /; DirQ[d], y___] :=
Module[{a, b = {"$$1", "$$2"}, c, p = Stilized[d], t = 1},
Map[Run["Dir " <> p <> If[SuffPref[p, "\\", 2], "", "\\"] <> # <>
" > " <> b[[t++]]] &, {" /S/B ", " /S "}];
c = If[ReadString[b[[1]]] === EndOfFile, True, False];
If[{y} != {} && SymbolQ[y],
y = StringReplace[ReadString[b[[2]]], "\n" –> ""], 7];
DeleteFile[b]; c]
In[3129]:= DirEmptyQ["c:\\Galina47"]
Out3[129]= DirEmptyQ["c:\\Galina47"]
In[3130]:= DirEmptyQ["c:\\Galina", gs]
Out[3130]= False
In[3131]:= gs
Out[3131]= "Volume in drive C is OS
Volume Serial Number is E22E-D2C5
Directory of c:\\galina
21.11.2019 15:27 <DIR>
.
21.11.2019 15:27 <DIR>
..
21.11.2019 17:46 <DIR>
Victor
0 File(s)
0 bytes
Directory of c:\\galina\\Victor
292
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
21.11.2019 17:46 <DIR>
.
21.11.2019 17:46 <DIR>
..
0 File(s)
0 bytes
Total Files Listed:
0 File(s)
0 bytes
5 Dir(s) 288 095 285 248 bytes free"
In addition to the previous DirEmptyQ procedure the call
DirFD[j] returns the 2-element nested list whose the 1st element
determines the list of subdirectories of the first nesting level of
a j directory whereas the second element – the list of files of a j
directory; if the j directory is empty, the procedure call returns
the empty list, i.e. {}. The fragment below presents source code
of the DirFD procedure with an example of its application.
In[320]:= DirFD[d_ /; DirQ[d]] := Module[{a = "$#$", b = {{}, {}},
c, h, t, p = StandPath[StringReplace[d, "/" –> "\\"]]},
If[DirEmptyQ[p], Return[{}], Null];
c = Run["Dir " <> p <> " /B " <> If[SuffPref[p, "\\", 2], "", "\\"]
<> "*.* > " <> a];
t = Map[ToString, ReadList[a, String]]; DeleteFile[a];
Map[{h = d <> "\\" <> #; If[DirectoryQ[h], AppendTo[b[[1]], #],
If[FileExistsQ[h], AppendTo[b[[2]], #], Null]]} &, t]; b]
In[321]:= DirFD["C:\\Program Files\\Wolfram Research\\
Mathematica\\12.1\\Documentation\\English\\Packages"]
Out[321]= {{"ANOVA", "Audio", "AuthorTools", …, {}}}
In[322]:= Length[%[[1]]]
Out[322]= 48
In particular, in the previous example the list of directories
with records on the packages delivered with the Mathematica
12.1 is returned. So, with Mathematica 48 packages of different
purpose that is simply seen from the name of the subdirectories
containing them are being delivered.
In addition to the DirFD procedure, the DirFull procedure
presents a certain interest whose call DirFull[j] returns list of all
full paths to subdirectories and files contained in a j directory
and its subdirectories; the 1st element of the list is the j directory.
Whereas on an empty j directory the call returns the empty list.
293
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
At last, the procedure call TypeFilesD[d] returns the sorted
list of types of files located in a d directory with returning word
"undefined" on files without of name extension. In addition, the
files located in the d directory and in all its subdirectories of an
arbitrary nesting level are considered. Moreover, on the empty
d directory the call TypeFilesD[d] returns the empty list, i.e. {}.
The FindFile1 procedure serves as a useful extension of the
standard FindFile function, providing search of a file within file
system of the computer. The call FindFile1[x] returns a full path
to the found file x, or the list of full paths (if the x file is located in
different directories of file system of the computer), otherwise the call
returns the empty list. Whereas the call FindFile1[x, y] with the
2nd optional y argument – full path to directory – returns full path
to the found x file, or list of full paths located in the y directory
and its subdirectories. At the same time, the FindFile2 function
serves as other useful extension of standard FindFile function,
providing search of a y file within a x directory. The function
call FindFile2[w, y] returns the list of full paths to the found y
file, otherwise the call returns the empty list. Search is done in
the w directory and all its subdirectories. The fragment below
presents source codes of the FindFile1 procedure and FindFile2
function with typical examples of their application.
In[7]:= FindFile1[x_ /; StringQ[x], y___] := Module[{c, d = {}, k = 1,
a = If[{y} != {} && PathToFileQ[y], {y},
Map[# <> ":\\" &, Adrive[]]], b = "\\" <> ToLowerCase[x]},
For[k, k <= Length[a], k++,
c = Map[ToLowerCase, Quiet[FileNames["*", a[[k]], Infinity]]];
d = Join[d, Select[c, SuffPref[#, b, 2] && FileExistsQ[#] &]]];
If[Length[d] == 1, d[[1]], d]]
In[8]:= FindFile1["Book_2020.doc"]
Out[8]= {"c:\\ma\\book_2020.doc", "e:\\ma\\book_2020.doc"}
In[9]:= FindFile2[x_ /; DirectoryQ[x], y_ /; StringQ[y]] :=
Select[FileNames["*.*", x, Infinity],
Stilized[FileNameSplit[#][[–1]]] == Stilized[y] &]
In[10]:= FindFile2["e:\\", "book_2020.doc"]
Out[10]= {"e:\\Mathematica\\Book_2020.doc"}
294
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
The FindFile1 in many respects is functionally similar to the
FileExistsQ1 procedure however in the time relation is partially
less fast-acting in the same file system of the computer (a number
of rather interesting questions of files and directories processing can be
found in the collection [15]).
It is possible to represent the SearchDir procedure as one
more indicative example, whose call SearchDir[d] returns the
list of all paths in file system of the computer that are completed
by a d subdirectory; in case of lack of such paths the procedure
call SearchDir[d] returns the empty list. In a combination with
the procedures FindFile1, FileExistsQ1 the SearchDir procedure
is a rather useful at operating with file system of the computer,
that confirms their use for the solution of problems of similar
type. The fragment below presents source code of the SearchDir
procedure with typical examples of its application.
In[9]:= SearchDir[d_ /; StringQ[d]] := Module[{a = Adrive[], c,
t = {}, p, b = "\\" <> ToLowerCase[StringTrim[d, ("\\"|"/") ...]]
<> "\\", g = {}, k = 1, v}, For[k, k <= Length[a], k++, p = a[[k]];
c = Map[ToLowerCase, Quiet[FileNames["*", p <>
":\\", Infinity]]];
Map[If[! StringFreeQ[#, b] || SuffPref[#, b, 2] &&
DirQ[#], AppendTo[t, #], Null] &, c]];
For[k = 1, k <= Length[t], k++, p = t[[k]] <> "\\";
a = StringPosition[p, b];
If[a == {}, Continue[], a = Map[#[[2]] &, a];
Map[If[DirectoryQ[v = StringTake[p, {1, # – 1}]],
AppendTo[g, v], Null] &, a]]]; DeleteDuplicates[g]]
In[10]:= SearchDir["\\Temp/"]
Out[11]= {"c:\\temp", …, "e:\\temp", "e:\\temp\\temp"}
By operating time these tools yield to our procedures isDir
and isFile for the Maple system, providing testing of files and
directories respectively [39]. So, the isFile procedure not only
tests the existence of a file, but also the mode of its openness,
what in certain cases is a rather important. There are also other
rather interesting tools for testing of the state of directories and
files, including their types [8-10,15,16].
295
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
The Mathematica has two standard functions RenameFile
and RenameDirectory for renaming of files and directories of
file system of the computer respectively. Meanwhile, from the
point of view of the file concept these functions would be very
expedient to be done by uniform tools because in this concept
directories and files are in many respects are identical and their
processing can be executed by the same tools. At the same time
the mentioned standard functions and on restrictions are quite
identical: for renaming of a name x of an element of file system
of the computer onto a new y name the element with name y
has to be absent in the system, otherwise $Failed with a certain
diagnostic message are returned. Furthermore, if as a y only a
new name without full path to a new y element is coded, then
it copying to the current directory is done; in a case of directory
x it with all contents is copied into the current directory under a
new y name. Therefore, similar organization is inconvenient in
many respects, what stimulated us to determine for renaming
of the directories and files the uniform RenDirFile procedure
that provides renaming of an element x (directory or file) in situ
with preservation of its type and all its attributes; at that, as an
argument y a new name of the x element is used. Therefore, the
successful procedure call RenDirFile[x, y] returns the full path
to the renamed x element. In a case of existence of an element y
the message "Directory/datafile <y> already exists" is returned. In
other unsuccessful cases the procedure call returns $Failed or is
returned unevaluated. With source code of the RenDirFile the
reader can familiarized, for example, in [10,15,16].
Meanwhile, at the same time to the means represented, we
have created a whole series of means for computer file system
access, that not only extend the capabilities of system functions
focused on similar work, but also significantly complement the
system capabilities, providing advanced facilities for processing
elements of the computer file system. Note that MathToolBox
tools [15,16] greatly enhance Mathematica's capabilities in the
context of the computer file system access. Below, some special
tools of files and directories processing are considered.
296
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
4.5. Special tools for files and directories processing
In this section some special means of processing of files and
directories are represented; in certain cases they can be useful.
Removal of a file in the current session is made by means of the
standard DeleteFile function whose call DeleteFile[{x, y, z, ...}]
returns Null, i.e. nothing in a case of successful removal of the
given file or their list, and $Failed otherwise. At the same time,
in the list of files only those are deleted that have no Protected–
attribute. Moreover, this operation doesn't save the deleted files
in the system $Recycle.Bin directory that in a number of cases
is extremely undesirable, first of all, in the light of possibility of
their subsequent restoration. The fact that the system function
DeleteFile is based on the MS DOS command Del that according
to specifics of this operating system immediately deletes a file
from file system of the computer without its preservation, that
significantly differs from similar operation of Windows system
that by default saves the deleted file in the special $Recycle.Bin
directory. For elimination of this shortcoming the DeleteFile1
procedure has been offered, whose source code with examples
of its application are represented by the fragment below.
In[57]:= DeleteFile1[x_ /; StringQ[x] || ListQ[x], t___] :=
Module[{a = Flatten[{x}], b, c, p = {}},
b = SysDir[] <> If[! StringFreeQ[Ver[], " XP "],
"recycler", "$recycle.bin"];
Map[{Quiet[Close[#]], c = Attribs[#],
If[{t} != {}, CopyFileToDir[#, b];
If[MemberQ[c, "R"], Attribs[#, y]; DeleteFile[#],
AppendTo[p, #]; DeleteFile[#]],
If[MemberQ[c, "R"], AppendTo[p, #],
CopyFileToDir[#, b]; DeleteFile[#]]]} &, a]; p]
In[58]:= DeleteFile1[{"c:/temp/СКА.doc", "c:/temp/rans_ian.txt",
"c:/temp/description.doc", "c:/temp/Шишаков.doc"}, gs]
Out[58]= {"c:/temp/rans_ian.txt", "c:/temp/description.doc"}
In[59]:= DeleteFile1[{"c:/temp/СКА.doc", "c:/temp/rans_ian.txt",
"c:/temp/description.doc", "c:/temp/Шишаков.doc"}]
Out[59]= {"c:/temp/СКА.doc", "c:/temp/Шишаков.doc"}
297
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
The procedure call DeleteFile1[x] where x – a separate file
or their list, returns the list of files x that have Protected attribute
with deleting files given by an argument x with saving them in
the $Recycle.Bin directory of the Windows system if they have
not Protected attribute. Meanwhile, the files removed by the call
DeleteFile1[x] are saved in $Recycle.bin directory however they
are invisible to viewing by the system tools, for example, by Ms
Explorer, complicating cleaning of the given system directory.
While the call DeleteFile1[x, t] with the 2nd optional t argument
– an expression – returns the list of files x that have not Protected
attribute with deleting files set by the argument x regardless of
whether they have Protected attribute with saving them in the
$recycle.bin directory of the Windows system. At the same time,
in the $recycle.bin directory a copy only of the last deleted file
always turns out. This procedure is oriented to Windows XP, 7
and above operational platforms however it can be spread and
to other operational platforms.
Note, the procedure substantially uses our SysDir function,
whose call SysDir[] returns the root directory of the DSS device
on which Windows is installed:
In[17]:= SysDir[] := StringTake[GetEnvironment["windir"][[2]],
{1, 3}]; SysDir[]
Out[17]= "C:\\"
in combination with the Attribs and CopyFileToDir procedures.
The first procedure was mentioned above, whereas the second
procedure is used by our other files and directories processing
tools too, extending the capabilities of the built-in access tools.
The procedure call CopyFileToDir[x, y] provides copying
of a file or directory x into a y directory with return of the full
path to the copied file or directory. In a case if the copied file x
already exists, it isn't updated; if the target directory already
exists, the x directory is copied into its subdirectory of the same
name. This procedure has a variety of appendices in problems
of processing of file system of the computer. The next fragment
represents source code of the CopyFileToDir procedure with an
example of its typical application.
298
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
In[361]:= CopyFileToDir[x_ /; PathToFileQ[x], y_ /; DirQ[y]] :=
Module[{a, b}, If[DirQ[x], CopyDir[x, y],
If[FileExistsQ[x], a = FileNameSplit[x][[–1]];
If[FileExistsQ[b = y <> "\\" <> a], b, CopyFile[x, b]], $Failed]]]
In[362]:= CopyFileToDir["c:/temp/СКА.doc", "c:/mathematica"]
Out[362]= "C:\\mathematica\\СКА.doc"
For restoration from the system directory $Recycler.Bin of
the packages which were removed by means of the DeleteFile1
procedure in Windows XP Professional, the RestoreDelPackage
procedure providing restoration from $recycler.bin directory of
such packages has been offered [1,8,12,16]. The successful call
RestoreDelPackage[F, "Context’"], where the first argument F
defines the name of a file of the format {"cdf", "m", "mx", "nb"}
that is subject to restoration whereas the second argument – the
context associated with a package returns the list of full paths to
the restored files, at the same time by deleting from directory
$Recycler.Bin the restored files with the necessary package. At
that, this tools is supported on the Windows XP platform, while
on the Windows 7 platform the RestoreDelFile procedure is of a
certain interest, restoring files from the directory $Recycler.Bin
that earlier were removed by the call of DeleteFile1 procedure.
The procedure call RestoreDelFile[f, r], where the 1st actual
argument f defines the name of a file or their list that are subject
to restoration, while the second r argument defines the name of
a target directory or full path to it for the restored files, returns
the directory for the restored files; at the same time the delete of
the restored files from the $recycle.bin directory is made in any
case. In a case of absence of the requested files in the $recycle.bin
directory the procedure call returns the empty list, i.e. {}, with
printing of the appropriate messages (such messages are print for
each file absent in the above Windows directory). It should be noted,
that the nonempty files are restored too. If the 2nd r argument
defines a directory name in string format, but not the full path
to it, a target r directory is created by means of call Directory[];
i.e. the current work directory. The fragment below represents
source code of the procedure with examples of its application.
299
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
In[2216]:= RestoreDelFile[f_ /; StringQ[f] || ListQ[f],
r_ /; StringQ[r]] := Module[{a = Flatten[{f}], b, c, d, p, t = 0},
b = SysDir[] <> "$Recycle.bin";
Map[{c = b <> "\\" <> #,
If[! FileExistsQ[c], Print["File " <> # <> " can`t be restored"];
t++, CopyFileToDir[c, p = If[DirQ[r], r, Directory[]]];
d = Attrib[c, "Attr"];
If[MemberQ[d[[1]], "R"], Attrib[c, {}], 7]; DeleteFile[c]]} &, a];
If[Length[a] == t, {}, b]]
In[2217]:= RestoreDelFile[{"description.doc", "Shishakov.doc",
"rans_ian.txt", "rans.txt"}, "c:\\restore"]
File rans.txt can`t be restored
Out[2217]= "C:\\Users\\Aladjev\\Documents"
In[2218]:= RestoreDelFile[{"description7.doc", "Vaganov.doc",
"rans.txt", "ian2019.txt"}, "c:\\restore"]
File description7.doc can`t be restored
File Vaganov.doc can`t be restored
File rans.txt can`t be restored
File ian2019.txt can`t be restored
Out[2218]= {}
On the other hand, for removal from $Recycle.bin directory
of the files saved by the DeleteFile1 procedure on the Windows
XP platform, the procedure is used whose call ClearRecycler[]
returns 0, deleting files of specified type from the $Recycle.bin
directory with saving in it of the files removed by of Windows
XP or its appendices. In addition, the Dick Cleanup command in
Windows XP in some cases completely does not clear $Recycler
from files what successfully does the call ClearRecycler["ALL"],
returning 0 and providing removal of all files from the system
Recycler directory. In [8,10,15] it is possible to familiarize with
source code of the ClearRecycler procedure and examples of its
use. For Windows 7 platform and above the ClearRecyclerBin
procedure provides removal from the Recycler directory of all
directories and files or only of those that are conditioned by the
DeleteFile1 procedure. The procedure call ClearRecyclerBin[]
returns Null, and provides removal from the system directory
$Recycle.Bin of directories and files which are deleted by the
300
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
DeleteFile1 procedure. Whereas the call ClearRecyclerBin[w],
where w – an arbitrary expression – also returns Null, i.e. nothing,
and removes from the $Recycle.Bin directory of all directories
and files whatever the cause of their emergence in the directory.
In addition, the procedure call on the empty Recycler directory
returns $Failed or nothing, depending on the operating platform.
The following fragment represents source code of the procedure
with typical examples of its application.
In[88]:= ClearRecyclerBin[x___] := Module[{c, d = {}, p, b = "#$#"},
c = SysDir[] <> If[! StringFreeQ[Ver[], " XP "],
"Recycler", "$Recycle.Bin"];
Run["Dir " <> c <> "/A/B/S/L > " <> b]; p = ReadList[b, String];
DeleteFile[b]; If[p == {}, Return[$Failed],
Map[{If[{x} != {}, Attrib[#, {}];
AppendTo[d, If[DirectoryQ[#], #, Nothing]];
Quiet[DeleteFile[#]],
If[SuffPref[FileNameSplit[#][[–1]], "$", 1] ||
SuffPref[#, "desktop.ini", 2], Null, Attrib[#, {}];
AppendTo[d, If[DirectoryQ[#], #, Nothing]];
Quiet[DeleteFile[#]]]]} &, p]]; Quiet[Map[DeleteDirectory, d]]; ]
In[89]:= ClearRecyclerBin[]
In[90]:= ClearRecyclerBin[All]
The following useful procedure has the general character at
operating with the devices of direct access and is rather useful
in a number of applications, above all, of the system character.
The procedure below to a great extent is an analogue of Maple
Vol_Free_Space procedure [41,42] that returns a volume of free
memory on devices of direct access. The call FreeSpaceVol[w]
depending on type of an actual w argument that should define
the logical name in string format of a device, returns simple or
the nested list; elements of its sublists determine a device name,
volume of free memory for device of direct access, and unit of
its measurement respectively. In a case of absence or inactivity
of the w device the procedure call returns the message "Device
is not ready". The following fragment represents source code of
the FreeSpaceVol procedure with a typical example of its use.
301
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
In[9]:= FreeSpaceVol[x_ /; MemberQ3[Join[CharacterRange["a",
"z"], CharacterRange["A", "Z"]], Flatten[{x}]]] :=
Module[{a = "#$#", c, d = Flatten[{x}], f},
f[y_] := Module[{n, b}, n = Run["Dir " <> y <> ":\\ > " <> a];
If[n != 0, {y, "Device is not ready"}, b = StringSplit[
ReduceAdjacentStr[ReadFullFile[a], " ", 1]][[–3 ;; –2]];
{y, ToExpression[StringReplace[b[[1]], "ÿ" –> ""]], b[[2]]}]];
c = Map[f, d]; DeleteFile[a]; If[Length[c] == 1, c[[1]], c]]
In[9]:= FreeSpaceVol[{"a", "c", "d", "e"}]
Out[9]= {{"a", "Device is not ready"}, {"c", 270305714176, "bytes"},
{"d", 0, "bytes"}, {"e", 2568826880, "bytes"}}
The procedure below facilitates solution of the problem of
use of external Mathematica programs or operational platform.
The procedure call ExtProgExe[x, y, h] provides a search in file
system of the computer of a {exe|com} file with program with
its subsequent execution on y arguments of the command string.
Both arguments x and y should be encoded in the string format.
Successful performance of this procedure returns the full path
to “$TempFile$” file of ASCII format that contains the result of
execution of a x program, and this file can be processed by the
standard tools on the basis of its structure. At that, in a case of
absence of the file with the demanded x program the procedure
call returns $Failed while using of the third h optional argument
– an arbitrary expression – the file with the x program uploaded
in the current directory defined by the function call Directory[],
is removed from this directory; also the “$TempFile$” datafile is
removed if it is empty or implementation of the x program was
terminated abnormally. The fragment below represents source
code of the ExtProgExe procedure with examples of its use.
In[310]:= ExtProgExe[x_ /; StringQ[x], y_ /; StringQ[y], h___] :=
Module[{a = "$TempFile$", b = Directory[] <> "\\" <> x, c, d},
d = x <> " " <> y <> " > " <> a;
Empty::file = "File $TempFile$ is empty; the file had been deleted.";
If[FileExistsQ[b], c = Run[d], c = LoadExtProg[x];
If[c === $Failed, Return[$Failed]]; c = Run[d];
If[{h} != {}, DeleteFile[b]]];
If[c != 0, DeleteFile[a]; $Failed, If[EmptyFileQ[a], DeleteFile[a];
302
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
Message[Empty::file], Directory[] <> "\\" <> a]]]
In[311]:= ExtProgExe["tasklist.exe", " /svc ", 1]
Out[311]= "C:\\Users\\Aladjev\\Documents\\$TempFile$"
In[312]:= ExtProgExe["systeminfo.exe", "", 1]
Out[312]= "C:\\Users\\Aladjev\\Documents\\$TempFile$"
In[313]:= ExtProgExe["Rans_Ian.com", "a", b]
Out[In[313]:= $Failed
The following procedure is a rather useful generalization of
built-in CopyFile function whose call CopyFile[a, b] returns the
full name of the file to it is copied and $Failed if it cannot do the
copy; in addition, file a must already exist, whereas b file must
not. Thus, in the program mode the standard CopyFile function
is insufficiently convenient. The procedure call CopyFile1[a, b]
returns the full path to the file that had been copied. In contrast
to CopyFile function, the procedure call CopyFile1[a, b] returns
the list of format {b, b*} where b – the full path to the copied file
and b* – the full path to the previously existing copy of a "xy.a"
file in the format "$xy$.a", if the target directory for b already
contained a file. In a case a ≡ b (where identity is considered up to
standardized paths of both files) the call returns the standardized
path to the a file, doing nothing. In other successful cases the
call CopyFile1[a, b] returns the full path to the copied file. Even
if the nonexistent path to the target directory for the copied file
is defined, then such path taking into account available devices
of direct access will be created. The fragment below represents
source code of the CopyFile1 procedure with typical examples
of its application which illustrate quite clearly the aforesaid.
In[81]:= CopyFile1[x_ /; FileExistsQ[x], y_ /; StringQ[y]] :=
Module[{a, b, c, d, p = Stilized[x], j = Stilized[y]},
b = Stilized[If[Set[a, DirectoryName[j]] === "", Directory[],
If[DirectoryQ[a], a, CDir[a]]]];
If[p == j, p, If[FileExistsQ[j], Quiet[Close[j]];
Quiet[RenameFile[j, c = StringReplace[j,
Set[d, FileBaseName[j]] –> "$" <> d <> "$"]]];
CopyFileToDir[p, b];
{b <> "\\" <> FileNameTake[p], j = b <> "\\" <> c},
CopyFileToDir[p, b]]]]
303
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
In[82]:= CopyFile1["C:/temp/СКА.doc", "СКА.DOC"]
Out[82]= {"c:\\users\\aladjev\\documents\\ска.doc",
"c:\\users\\aladjev\\documents\\$ска$.doc"}
In[83]:= CopyFile1["c:/temp/cka.doc", "g:\\Grodno\\Сka.doc"]
Out[83]= "C:\\grodno\\ска.doc"
So, the tools represented in the chapter sometimes a rather
significantly simplify programming of problems dealing with
file system of the computer. Along with that, these tools extend
built-in means of access, illustrating a number of useful enough
methods of programming of tasks of similar type. These means
in a number of cases significantly supplement the access tools
supported by system, facilitating programming of a number of
rather important appendices that deal with the files of various
format. Our experience of programming of the access tools that
extend the similar means of the Mathematica allows to notice
that basic access tools of Mathematica in combination with its
global variables allow to program more simply and effectively
the user original access tools. Moreover, the created access tools
possess sometimes by the significantly bigger performance in
relation to the similar means developed in the Maple software.
Thus, in the Mathematica it is possible to solve the tasks linked
with rather complex algorithms of processing of files, while in
the Maple, first of all, in a case of rather large files the efficiency
of such algorithms leaves much to be desired. In a number of
appendices the means, represented in the present chapter along
with other similar means from package [16] are represented as
rather useful, by allowing, at times, to essentially simplify the
programming. At that, it must be kept in mind, a lot of means
which are based on the Run function and the DOS commands
generally can be nonportable to other versions of the system and
operational platform demanding the appropriate debugging to
appropriate new conditions. In general, our access tools [1-16]
are usefully expand and supplement the built-in Mathematica
tools of the same purpose, making it easier to solve a number of
tasks of processing elements of the computer's file system. At
present our access tools [16] are used in various applications.
304
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
Chapter 5: Organization of the user software
The Mathematica no possess comfortable enough tools for
organization of the user libraries similarly to the case of Maple,
creating certain difficulties at organization of the user software
developed in its environment. For saving of definitions objects
and results of calculations Mathematica uses files of different
organization. At that, files of text format that not only are easily
loaded into the current session, in general are most often used,
but also are convenient enough for processing by other known
means, for example, the word processors. Moreover, the text
format provides the portability on other computing platforms.
One of the main prerequisites of saving in files is possibility of
use of definitions along with their usage for the Mathematica
objects in the subsequent sessions of the system. At that, with
questions of standard saving of objects (blocks, modules, functions
etc.) the interested reader can familiarize in details in [1-15,17],
some of them were considered in this book in the context of
organization of packages while here we present simple tools of
organization of the user libraries in the Mathematica system.
Meanwhile, here it is expedient to make a number of very
essential remarks on use of the above system means. First, the
mechanism of processing of erroneous and especial situations
represents a rather powerful mean of programming practically
of each quite complex algorithm. However, in the Mathematica
such mechanism is characterized by essential shortcomings, for
example, successfully using in the Input mode the mechanism
of messages print concerning erroneous {Off, On} situations, in
body of procedures such mechanism generally doesn't work as
illustrates the following a rather simple fragment:
In[1117]:= Import["C:\\Mat\\A.m"]
… Import::nffil: File C:\Mat\A.m not found during Import.
Out[17]= $Failed
In[1118]:= Off[Import::nffil]
In[1119]:= Import["D:\\Mat\\A.m"]
Out[1119]= $Failed
305
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
In[1123]:= On[Import::nffil]
In[24]:= F[x_] := Module[{a}, Off[Import::nffil];
a := Import[x]; On[Import::nffil]; a]
In[1125]:= F["C:\\Mat\\A.m"]
… Import::nffil: File C:\Mat\A.m not found during Import.
Out[1125]= $Failed
In a case of creation of rather complex procedures in which
is required to solve questions of the suppressing of output of a
number of erroneous messages, tools of Mathematica system
are presented to us as insufficiently developed. The interested
reader can familiarize with other peculiarities of the specified
system tools in [1-15]. Now, we will present certain approaches
concerning creation of the user libraries in Mathematica. Some
of them can be useful in practical work with Mathematica.
In view of the scheme of organization of library considered
in Maple [26] with organization different from the main library,
we will present realization of the similar user library for a case
of the Mathematica. On the first step in a directory, let us say,
"c:/Lib" the txt–files with definitions of the user tools with their
usage are placed. In principle, you can to place any number of
definitions in the txt–files, in this case it is previously necessary
to read a txt-file whose name coincides with name of the required
tool, whereupon in the current session tools whose definitions
are located in the file with usage are available. It is convenient
in a case when in a single file are located the main tools along
with tools accompanying them, excluding system tools. On the
second step the tools together with their usage are created and
debugged with their subsequent saving in the required file of a
library subdirectory "C:\\Lib".
To save the definitions and usage in txt-files perhaps in two
ways, namely: (1) by the function call Save, saving previously
evaluated definitions and their usage in a txt–file given by its
first argument; at that, saving is made in the append–mode, or
(2) by creating txt–files with names of tools and usage whose
contents are formed by means of a simple word processor, for
example, Notepad. At that, by means of the Save function we
306
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
have possibility to create libraries of the user tools, located in
an arbitrary directory of file system of the computer.
For operating with txt-files of such organization was created
the procedure CallSave whose call CallSave[x,y,z] returns the
result of a call y[z] of a tool y on the z list of factual arguments
passed to y provided that the tool definition y with usage are
located in a x txt–file that has been earlier created by means of
Save function. If a tool with the given y name is absent in the x
file, the procedure call returns $Failed. If a x data-file contains
definitions of several tools of the same name y, the procedure
call CallSave[x,y,z] is executed relative to their definition whose
formal arguments correspond to a z list of actual arguments. If
y determines the list, the call returns the names list of all tools
located in the x file [1,16,24]. More detailed information on the
capabilities of such organization of user libraries can be found
in [5-10]. In our opinion, the represented approach quite can be
used for the organization of simple and effective user libraries
of traditional type.
As another an useful enough approach, based on the use of
mx–format files to store tool definitions and their usage, we will
introduce the CALLmx procedure whose the call serves to save
means definitions in the library directory in files of mx–format
with their subsequent uploading into the current session. The
possibilities of the procedure can be found in [1,5,10,11,16]. It is
possible to represent the UserLib procedure that supports some
useful enough functions as one more rather simple example of
maintaining the user libraries. The call UserLib[W, g] provides a
number of important functions on maintaining of a simple user
library located in a W file of txt–format. As the second actual g
argument the 2–element list acts that defines such functions as:
(1) return of the list of tools names, contained in W, (2) print to
the screen of full contents of a library file W or a separate tool,
(3) saving in the library file W in the append-mode of a tool with
the given name, (4) loading into the current session of all tools
whose definitions are in the W, (5) uploading into the current
session of a tool with the given name whose definition is in the
307
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
W library file. There is a rather good opportunity to extend the
procedure with a number of useful enough functions such as
deletion from a library of definitions of the specified means or
their obsolete versions, etc. With the procedure the reader can
familiarize more in details, for example, in [4-9,15,16].
The list structure of the Mathematica allows to rather easily
simulate the operating with structures of a number of systems
of computer mathematics, for example, Maple. So, in Maple the
tabular structure as one of the most important structures is used
that is rather widely used both for the organization of structures
of data, and for organization of the libraries of software. Similar
tabular organization is widely used for organization of package
modules of Maple along with a number of tools of our UserLib
library [42]. For simulation of main operations with the tabular
organization similar to the Maple, in Mathematica the Table1
procedure can be used. On a basis of such tabular organization
supported by the Table1 procedure it is rather simply possible
to determine the user libraries. As one of such approaches we
presented an example of the library LibBase whose structural
organization has format of the ListList–type [14,16]. The main
operations with the library organized thus are supported by the
procedure TabLib whose source code with examples of its use
are represented in [8-10,12,15,16].
The interested reader can develop own means of the library
organization in Mathematica, using approaches offered by us
along with others. However, the problem of organization of
convenient help bases for the user libraries exists. A number of
approaches in this direction can be found in [14]. In particular,
on a basis of the list structure supported by Mathematica, it is
rather simply to define help bases for the user libraries. On this
basis as one of possible approaches an example of the BaseHelp
procedure has been represented, whose structural organization
has the list format [10,16]. Meanwhile, it is possible to create the
help bases on a basis of packages containing usage on means of
the user library which are saved in files of mx–format. At that,
for complete library it is possible to create only one help mx-file,
308
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
uploading it as required into the current session by means of
the Get function with receiving in the subsequent of access to
all usage that are in the file. The Usage procedure can represent
an quite certain interest for organization of a help database for
the user libraries [8,9,12,16]. There too the interested reader can
find and other useful tools for organizing user libraries.
5.1. MathToolBox package for Mathematica system
However, allowing the above approaches to organization of
the user software, in our opinion the most convenient approach
is the organization on the basis of packages. The packages are
one of the main mechanisms of Mathematica extension which
contain definitions of the new symbols with their usage that are
intended for use both outside of package and in it. The symbols
can correspond, in particular, to the definitions of new means
defined in the package that extend the functional Mathematica
possibilities. At that, according to the adopted system agreement
all new symbols that entered in a certain package are placed in
a context whose name is connected with name of the package.
At uploading of a package in the current session, the given
context is added into the beginning of the list defined by global
$ContextPath variable. As a rule, for ensuring of association of a
package with context a construction BeginPackage["x'"] coded
at its beginning is used. At uploading of package in the current
session the "x'" context will update the current values of global
variables $Context and $ContextPath. The closing bracket of the
package is construction EndPackage[]. The package body itself,
as a rule, consists of 2 parts – reference information (usage) for
all symbols included in the package and definitions of symbols
constituting the package. So, the N symbol help is framed in the
form N::usage = "Description of N symbol". In turn, the symbols
definitions are framed with constructs of the following format
Begin["`N`"] and End[], for example, for the above symbol N. So,
as a matter of experience works with Mathematica system, as a
basis of the organization of the user software we offer a scheme.
309
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
At the first stage, in a new nb–document a program object
of the following organization is formed, namely:
General information on a package
BeginPackage["Context`"]
N1::usage = "Description of N1 tool"
============================
Np::usage = "Description of Np tool"
Begin["`N1`"]
Definition of N1 tool
End[]
=============================
Begin["`Np`"]
Definition of Np tool
End[]
EndPackage[]
Before the main body of the object the general information
about the package is placed, followed by the opening bracket of
the package with a context assigned to it. The opening bracket
is followed by a set of the usage–sentences containing reference
information for all package tools named N1, ..., Np. At the same
time, it should be noted that each tool included in the package
must have the appropriate usage–sentence, otherwise, if you
upload the package into the current session, you will not have
access to such tool. The definition of each tool to be included in
the given package is then placed in special block, for example,
Begin["`N1`"] ... End[], ending all such blocks with the closing
bracket EndPackage[]. The definitions of means included in the
package should be previously, whenever possible, are debugged
including processing of the main special and error situations.
At the second stage by a chain of commands “Evaluation →
Evaluation Notebook” of the graphic user interface (GUI) is made
evaluation of the Notebook, i.e. actually the package with return
of results of the following form:
310
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
In[3212]:= BeginPackage["Agn`"]
Name::usage = "Description of Name tool"
Begin["`Name`"]
Name[x_] := x^2
End[]
Begin["`Name1`"]
Name1[x_] := x^3
End[]
EndPackage[]
Out[3212]= "Agn`"
Out[3213]= "Description of Name tool"
Out[3214]= "Agn`Name`"
Out[3216]= "Agn`Name`"
Out[3217]= "Agn`Name1`"
Out[3219]= "Agn`Name1`"
In[3220]:= CNames["Agn`"]
Out[3220]= {"Name"}
The procedure call CNames["Agn`"] returns the name list in
string format of all symbols whose definitions are located in the
package with context "Agn`".
The evaluation of the above package with context "Agn`" in
the current session activates all definitions and usage contained
in the package. Therefore the following stage consists in saving
of the package in files of formats {nb, mx}. The first saving is
made by a chain of commands of GUI "File → Save", whereas
by a call of the built-in system function DumpSave of the format
In[15]:= DumpSave["c:\\Math\\FileName.mx", "Agn`"]
Out[15]= {"Agn`"}
saving of this package in a file "FileName.mx" of the Math
directory is provided (names of directory and file to the discretion
of the user) with return of list of contexts ascribed to the package.
All subsequent loadings of the mx–file with the package to the
current session are made at any time, when demanding use of
the tools that are contained in it, by a call of the built–in system
function Get of the format Get["C:\\Math\\FileName.mx"].
311
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
As noted above the built-in DumpSave function writes out
definitions in a binary format that is optimized for input by the
Mathematica. Meantime, at the call DumpSave[f, x] where f is a
file of mx–format a symbol, list of symbols or a context can be
used as the 2nd x argument. In order to enhance the call format
of the DumpSave function some tools have been proposed [15].
In particular, the procedure call DumpSave1[x, y] returns
the nested list whose first element defines the full path to a file
x of mx–format (if necessary to the file is assigned the mx–extension)
whereas the second element defines the list of objects and/or
contexts from the list defined by argument y whose definitions
were unloaded into the x file of mx–format.
Evaluation of definition of a symbol x in the current session
it will associate with the context of "Global'" which remains at
its unloading into a mx–file by the DumpSave function. While
in some cases there is a need of saving of symbols in the files of
mx–format with other contexts. This problem is solved by the
procedure whose call DumpSave2[f, x, y] returns nothing, at the
same time unloading into mx–file f the definition of symbol or
the list of symbols x that have context "Global'", with context y.
Thus, in the current session the x symbol receive the y context.
Finally, a simple DumpSave3 procedure allows an arbitrary
expression to be used as the second argument of the procedure.
Calling the DumpSave3[f, exp] procedure returns a variable in a
string format while saving an exp expression in a mx-file f. Then
the subsequent call Get[f] returns nothing with activating the
variable returned by the previous call DumpSave3[f, exp] with
the exp value assigned to it. The fragment below represent the
source code of the procedure with an example of it application.
In[2267]:= DumpSave3[f_ /; StringQ[f], exp_] := Module[{a},
{ToString[a], a := exp, DumpSave[f, a]}[[1]]]
In[2268]:= DumpSave3["dump.mx", a*77 + b*78]
Out[2268]= "a$33218"
In[2269]:= Clear["a$33218"]
In[2270]:= Get["dump.mx"]; ToExpression["a$33218"]
Out[2270]= 77*a + 78*b
312
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
Fundamental differences between files of two formats mx
and nb assume to save packages at least in files of these types,
and that is why. Files of mx–format are optimized for input in
Mathematica, each such file has a plain text header identifying
its type and contexts ascribed to it. In turn, the rest of a mx–file
containing definitions of tools is presented in the dump binary
format that is not allowing to edit it. Files saved by DumpSave
function can be load by Get function. Meantime, files of format
mx can`t be exchanged between operating systems that differ in
compliance with $SystemWordLength predefined variable.
Whereas files of the format nb (notebooks) are structured
interactive documents that can contain calculations, text, typeset
expressions, user interface elements, etc. Notebooks are typical
method of interacting with Mathematica front end. Files of this
format are automatically associated with the Mathematica on
computers which have the Mathematica installed. In addition,
mx–files contain only printable ASCII characters, are viewable
and largely readable in any text editor. In addition, notebooks
are cross–platform, meaning that a notebook created on any
supported platform can be read by Mathematica on any other
platform. Therefore to edit a package it is reasonable to do on
the basis of the nb–file containing it while most effective to do
the current work with the package on the basis of its mx–file.
It is this approach to software saving that we have chosen
and implemented in the package MathToolBox. Our package
MathToolBox [16] that is attached to the present book can as a
bright example of the above organization of the user software.
Package contains more than 1320 tools eliminating restrictions
of a number of standard tools of the Mathematica, and expand
its software with new tools. In this context, MathToolBox can
serve as a certain additional tool of procedural programming,
especially useful in the numerous applications where certain
non–standard evaluations have to accompany programming. In
addition, tools presented in MathToolBox have a direct relation
to principal questions of procedural–functional programming
in Mathematica, not only for the decision of applied problems,
313
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
but, above all, for creation of software that extends frequently
used facilities of the system and/or eliminating their defects or
extending the system with new facilities. Software presented in
this package contains a number of rather useful and effective
receptions of programming in the Mathematica, and extends its
software which allows in the system to programme the tasks of
various purpose more simply and effectively. Additional tools
composing the above package embrace the following sections
of the Mathematica system, namely:
- additional tools in interactive mode of the system
- additional tools of processing of expressions
- additional tools of processing of symbols and strings
- additional tools of processing of sequences and lists
- additional tools expanding standard built-in functions or the system
software as a whole (control structures branching and loop, etc.)
- determination of procedures in the Mathematica software
- determination of the user functions and pure functions
- means of testing of procedures and functions
- headings of procedures and function
- formal arguments of procedures and functions
- local variables of modules and blocks; means of their processing
- global variables of modules and blocks; means of their processing
- attributes, options and values by default for arguments of the user
blocks, functions and modules; additional means of their processing
- useful additional means for processing of procedures and functions
- additional means of the processing of internal Mathematica files
- additional means of the processing of external Mathematica files
- additional tools of the processing of attributes of directories and files
- additional and special means of processing of directories and files
- additional tools of work with packages and contexts ascribed to them
- organization of the user software in the Mathematica system
Archive Archive76.ZIP with this package (Freeware license)
can be freely downloaded here [16]. Archive contains 5 files of
formats {nb, mx, cdf, m, txt}. Such approach allows to satisfy the
user on different operating platforms. Memory size demanded
314
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
for the MathToolBox package in Mathematica of version 12.1.0
(on platform Windows 7 Professional) yields the following result:
In[1]:= MemoryInUse[]
Out[1]= 85042560
In[2]:= Get["C:\\Mathematica\\MathToolBox.mx"]
In[3]:= MemoryInUse[]
Out[3]= 96349800
In[4]:= N[(% – %%%)/1024^2]
Out[4]= 10.7834
i.e. in Mathematica 12.1.0 the MathToolBox package demands a
little more 10.78 Mb while amount of tools whose definitions are
located in the package, at the moment of its load to the current
session of the Mathematica system is available on the basis of
the following simple evaluation:
In[5]:= Length[CNames["AladjevProcedures`"]]
Out[5]= 1325
where CNames – tool from the package, "AladjevProcedures`" –
context ascribed to it. More detailed information on the means
contained in the package can be found in [1-16].
Because the MathToolBox package contains definitions and
usage for a large number of frequently used tools that often use
each other, it is useful to define uploading of the package when
you load Mathematica itself. To this end, you can to update the
Init.m file of txt-format from $UserBaseDirectory <> "\\kernel"
directory adding to it the entry Get["Dir\\MathToolBox.mx"]
where Dir determines the full path to directory with mx–file of
the package. It's easy to do with a simple text editor or in the
current session of Mathematica. Furthermore, for this purpose
it is possible to use a simple Init procedure whose source code
with a typical example of its application is represented below.
In[317]:= Init[x_ /; StringQ[x]] := Module[{a, b, c},
a[d_] := StringReplace[d, "\\" –> "/"];
b = $UserBaseDirectory <> "\\kernel\\Init.m";
c = ReadString[b]; OpenWrite[b];
WriteString[b, c, "\n", a["Get[" <> "\"" <> x <> "\"]"]]; Close[b]]
315
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
In[318]:= Init["C:\\Mathematica\\MathToolBox.mx"]
Out[318]= "C:\\Users\\Aladjev\\AppData\\Roaming\\
Mathematica\\kernel\\Init.m"
The procedure call Init[x] where actual argument x defines the
full path to a file of format mx, nb or m with the user package in
addition mode updates the above file "Init.m" which locates in
the user directory defined by the predefined $UserBaseDirectory
variable according to the corresponding condition. In particular,
if "Init.m" file had content before the procedure call
(** User Mathematica initialization file **),
then as a result of the procedure call the file gets the content
(** User Mathematica initialization file **)
Get["C:/Mathematica/MathToolBox.mx"]
After that, as a result of uploading Mathematica all means
of the package become available in the current session along
with updating of the lists of contexts defined by predetermined
variables $Packages and $ContextPath by the package context.
While the function call Contexts[] returns the list of all contexts
supplemented by contexts "AladjevProcedures'Name'", where
Name is the name of a package tool. The above scheme of the
organization of the user software provides access to means of a
package on an equal basis with built–in system means at once
after uploading of the Mathematica except for two moments:
(1) help on a tool N is available by ?N or by ??N only, and (2) all
source codes of the package means are open.
The above technique allows to program a simple function,
whose call JoinTxtFiles[x, y] returns the path to a x file that is
updated by adding of a file y to the contents of a text file x.
In[35]:= JoinTxtFiles[x_String, y_String] := {WriteString[x,
ReadString[x], "\n", ReadString[y]], Close[x]}[[2]]
In[36]:= JoinTxtFiles["C:/Temp/In.txt", "C:/Temp/In1.txt"]
Out[36]= "C:/Temp/In.txt"
The above fragment represents source code of the function
JoinTxtFiles with a typical example of its application.
316
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
The above method loads the desired file at the beginning of
the current session, while on the function call Needs[Context, f]
the desired file f (including the mx–file) with the package can be
loaded at any time of the current session and its context placed
in $Packages and $ContextPath, if it was not already there.
Meanwhile, it is appropriate to make one very significant
comment here. The MathToolBox package [16] was created for
a rather long period of time, albeit with a number of intervals.
Therefore, Mathematica releases 8.0 – 12.1 are responsible for
creating the tools that make it possible additional debugging of
tools to the current Mathematica release. The stability of builtin Math–language of the Mathematica system is significantly
higher than the corresponding component of the Maple system,
but it is also not 100%. That is why, in some cases the necessary
additional debugging of some package tools is required, that in
the vast majority of cases is not essentially difficult. Naturally,
due to a rather large number of package means, such additional
debugging was carried out by us in a limited enough amount,
leaving it to the reader who uses certain package means in his
activities. In most cases, the means features of the package are
compatible with the Mathematica 12.1.0 software environment.
Note that some package tools are functionally fully or partially
duplicate each other, illustrating different useful programming
approaches and techniques, or certain undocumented (hidden)
capabilities of the built–in the Mathematica language.
In any case, as demonstrated by many years of experience
in teaching different courses in Mathematica at universities in
Belarus and the Baltic States, this package not only represents
the tools for applied and system programming in Mathematica,
but also proved to be a rather useful collection of tasks aimed
both at mastering programming in Mathematica system and at
increasing its level as a whole. Being a rather useful reference
and training material describing a lot of useful programming
techniques in Mathematica, including the non–standard ones,
the MathToolBox package is attached as an auxiliary material
to our books [8-15].
317
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
5.2. Operating with the user packages in Mathematica
Similarly to the well–developed software the Mathematica
is an extendable system, i.e. in addition to the built–in tools that
quite cover requirements of quite wide range of the users, the
system allows to program those tools that absent for the specific
user of built–in language along with extending and correcting
standard software. At that, the user can find the missing tools
which are not built–in in numerous packages delivered with the
Mathematica, and existing packages for various applied fields.
The question consists only in finding of a package necessary for
a concrete case containing definitions of functions, modules and
other objects demanded for applications that are programmed
in the Mathematica. A package has standard organization and
contains definitions of various objects, these or those functions,
procedures, variables, etc., that solve well–defined problems.
Mathematica provides a standard set of packages whose
list is defined by a concrete version of the system. For receiving
of packages list which are delivered with the current release of
the Mathematica it is possible to use the procedure, whose call
MathPackages[] returns list of packages names with a certain
confidence speaking about their basic purpose. While the call
MathPackages[j] with optional j argument (an indefinite variable)
returns through it in addition the three–element list whose the
1st element defines the current release of Mathematica, the 2nd
element – the type of the license and the 3rd element – deadline
of action of the license [16]. The following fragment represents
the typical examples of its application.
In[91]:= MathPackages[]
Out[91]= {"AbelianGroup", "AbortHandling", …, "ZTransform"}
In[92]:= Length[%]
Out[92]= 3712
In[93]:= MathPackages[gs]; gs
Out[93]= {"12.1.0 for Microsoft Windows (64–bit)
(March 14, 2020)", "Professional", "Sun31May"}
From the fragment follows that the Mathematica of version
12.1.0 contains 3712 packages oriented on different appendices,
318
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
including the packages of strictly system purpose. Before use of
means contained in an applied package, the package should be
previously loaded to the current Mathematica session by means
of the function call Get[Package].
The concept of context in Mathematica. In Mathematica
this concept was entered for organization of work with symbols
that present various objects (modules, functions, variables, packages
and so on), in particular, in order to avoid the possible conflicts
with symbols of the same name. Main idea consists in that that
full name of an arbitrary symbol consists of two parts, namely:
a context and a short name, i.e. the full name of a certain object
has format: "context'short name" where the sign <'> (backquote)
carries out the role of some marker, identifying context in the
system. For example, Agn'Vs represents a symbol with the Agn
context and with short Vs name. At that, with such symbols it
is possible to execute various operations as with usual names;
furthermore, the system considers aaa'xy and bbb'xy as various
symbols. So, the most widespread use of context consists in its
assignment to functionally identical or semantically connected
symbols. For example, Agn`StandPath, Agn`MathPackages define
that procedures StandPath and MathPackages belong to the same
group of the means which associate with "Agn'" context which
is ascribed to a certain package. The current context of a session
is in the global variable $Context:
In[2223]:= $Context
Out[2223]= "Global`"
In the current Mathematica session the current context by
default is determined as "Global'". Whereas the global variable
$ContextPath determines the list of contexts after the $Context
variable for search of a symbol entered into the current session.
It is possible to reffer to the symbols from the current context
simply by their short names; thus, if this symbol intersects with
a symbol from the list determined by the $ContextPath variable,
the second symbol will be used instead of the symbol from the
current context, for example:
In[2224]:= $ContextPath
319
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
Out[2224]= {"DocumentationSearch`", "ResourceLocator`",
"URLUtilities`", "AladjevProcedures`", "PacletManager`",
"System`", "Global`"}
While the calls Context[x] and Contexts[] return a context
ascribed to a x symbol and the list of all contexts of the current
session respectively:
In[2225]:= Context[DeleteFile1]
Out[2225]= "AladjevProcedures`"
In[2226]:= Contexts[]
Out[2226]= {"AladjevProcedures`", …, "$CellContext`"}
In addition, by analogy with file system of the computer,
contexts quite can be compared with directories. It is possible
to determine the path to a file, specifying a directory containing
it and a name of the file. At the same time, the current context
can be quite associated with the current directory to the files of
which can be referenced simply by their names. Furthermore,
like file system the contexts can have hierarchical structure, in
particular, "Visualization`VectorFields`VectorFieldsDump`". So,
the path of search of a context of symbols in the Mathematica
is similar to a path of search of program files. At the beginning
of the session the current context by default is "Global'", and all
symbols entered in the session are associated with this context,
excepting the built-in symbols, e.g., Do, that are associated with
"System'" context. Path of search of contexts by default includes
the contexts for system–defined symbols. While for the symbols
removed by means of the Remove function, the context can not
be determined. At using of contexts there is no guarantee that 2
symbols of the same name are available in different contexts.
Therefore the Mathematica defines as a maximum priority the
priority of choice of that symbol with this name, whose context
is the first in the list which is determined by the global variable
$ContextPath. Therefore, for placement of such context at the
beginning of the specified list you can use the construction:
In[30]:= $ContextPath
Out[30]= {"DocumentationSearch`", "ResourceLocator`",
"URLUtilities`", "PacletManager`", "System`", "Global`"}
320
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
In[31]:= PrependTo[$ContextPath, "Ian`"]
Out[31]= {"Ian`", "DocumentationSearch`", "URLUtilities`",
"ResourceLocator`", "PacletManager`", "System`", "Global`"}
In[32]:= $ContextPath
Out[32]= {"Ian`", "DocumentationSearch`", "URLUtilities`",
"ResourceLocator`", "PacletManager`", "System`", "Global`"}
An useful procedure provides assignment of a context to a
definite or indefinite symbol. The call ContextToSymbol1[x,y,z]
returns Null, i.e. nothing, providing assignment of a y context
to a x symbol while the third optional z argument – the string –
defines for x an usage; at its absence for an undefinite x symbol
the usage – empty string, i.e. "", whereas for a definite x symbol
the usage has view "Help on x". With the ContextToSymbol1
procedure and examples of its use can familiarize in [8,15,16].
A rather useful procedure in a certain relation expands the
above procedure and provides assignment of the set context to
a definite symbol. The call ContextToSymbol2[x,y] returns twoelement list of format {x,y} where x – the name of the processed
definite x symbol and y – its new context, providing assignment
of a y context to the definite x symbol; while the procedure call
ContextToSymbol2[x, y, z] with the optional third z argument –
an arbitrary expression – also returns 2–element list of the above
format {x, y}, providing assignment of a certain y context to the
definite x symbol with saving of symbol definition x and all its
attributes along with usage in file "x.mx".
Thence, before a procedure call ContextToSymbol2[x, y] for
change of the existing context of a symbol x on a new y symbol
in the current session it is necessary to evaluate definition of x
symbol and its usage in the format x::usage = "Help on x object."
(if an usage exists, of course) with assignment to the x symbol of
necessary attributes.
In addition, along with possibility of assignment of the set
context to symbols the procedure ContextToSymbol2 is a rather
useful means for extension by new means of the user package
contained in a mx-file. The technology of similar updating is as
follows. On the first step the definition of a new x tool with its
321
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
usage describing these tools is evaluated along with ascribing
of the necessary attributes. On the second step, by means of the
call ContextToSymbol2[x, y, j] the assignment of a y context to x
symbol along with its usage with saving of the updated x object
in "x.mx" file is provided. At last, the call Get[w] loads into the
current session the revised user package located in a mx–file w
with an y context, whereas the subsequent call DumpSave[p, y]
saves in the updated mx–file w all objects which have y context,
including the objects that earlier have been obtained by means
of the procedure call ContextToSymbol2[x, y] or Get["x.mx"].
Such approach provides a rather effective method of updating
of the user packages located in mx–files [8-10,12-16].
The ContextToSymbol3 procedure is a useful modification
of the above procedure ContextToSymbol2. The procedure call
ContextToSymbol3[x, y] returns 2–element list of format {x, y},
where x – the name in string format of a definite x symbol, y –
its new context, providing assignment of a certain y context to
the definite x symbol; on the inadmissible arguments the call is
returned as unevaluated. The fragment below represents source
code of the ContextToSymbol3 procedure with example its use.
In[2214]:= ContextToSymbol3[x_ /; StringQ[x] &&
SymbolQ[x] && ! NullQ[x] && ! SameQ[x, "System`"],
y_ /; ContextQ[y]] :=
Module[{a = Flatten[{PureDefinition[x]}], b, c, d, h},
b = StringSplit[a[[1]], {"[", " = ", " := "}][[1]];
h = Help[Symbol[b]]; c = Attributes[x];
ToExpression["Unprotect[" <> b <> "]"];
d = "BeginPackage[\"" <> y <> "\"]" <> "\n" <>
If[NullQ[h], "", b <> "::usage=" <> ToString1[h]] <> "\n" <>
StringJoin[Map[# <> "\n" &, a]] <> "EndPackage[]";
Remove[x]; Quiet[ToExpression[d]];
ToExpression["SetAttributes[" <> b <> "," <> ToString[c] <> "]"]; {b, y}]
In[2215]:= V77[x_] := Module[{a = 42}, a*x];
V77[x_, y_] := Module[{}, x*y]; V77::usage = "Help on V77.";
SetAttributes[V77, {Listable, Protected}]
In[2216]:= ContextToSymbol3["V77", "AvzAgnVsv`"]
Out[2216]= {"V77", "AvzAgnVsv`"}
322
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
In[2217]:= Attributes[V77]
Out[2217]= {Listable, Protected}
In[2218]:= Definition[V77]
Out[2218]= Attributes[V77] = {Listable, Protected}
V77[x_] := Module[{a = 42}, a*x]
V77[x_, y_] := Module[{}, x*y]
In[2219]:= Context[V77]
Out[2219]= "AvzAgnVsv`"
In[2220]:= ?V77
Out[2220]= "Help on V77."
On the basis of the previous procedure, RenameMxContext
procedure was programmed whose call RenameMxContext[x,y]
returns the name of a mx–file x with replacement of its context
by a new y context; at that, the package located in the existing x
file can be uploaded into current session or not, while at use of
the third optional argument – an arbitrary expression – the call
RenameMxContext[x, y, z] additionally removes the x package
from the current session. The fragment presents source code of
the RenameMxContext procedure with examples of its use.
In[3368]:= BeginPackage["RansIan`"]
GSV::usage = "Help on GSV."
ArtKr::usage = "Help on ArtKr."
Begin["`ArtKr`"]
ArtKr[x_, y_, z_] := Module[{a = 74}, a*x*y*z]
End[]
Begin["`GSV`"]
GSV[x_, y_] := Module[{a = 69}, a*x*y]
End[]
EndPackage[];
In[3378]:= DumpSave["avzagn.mx", "RansIan`"]
Out[3378]= {"RansIan`"}
In[3379]:= CNames["RansIan`"]
Out[3379]= {"ArtKr", "GSV"}
In[3380]:= RenameMxContext[x_ /; FileExistsQ[x] &&
FileExtension[x] == "mx", y_ /; ContextQ[y], z___] :=
Module[{a = ContextInMxFile[x], b = Quiet[Check[Get[x], "Er"]], c},
If[b === "Er", "File " <> x <> " is corrupted", b = CNames[a];
c = Quiet[AppendTo[Map[a <> # <> "`" &, b], a]];
323
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
Map[Quiet[ContextToSymbol3[#, y]] &, b];
ToExpression["DumpSave[" <> ToString1[x] <> "," <> ToString1[y]
<> "]"]; DeletePackage[a]; If[{z} != {}, x, DeletePackage[y]; x]]]
In[3381]:= RenameMxContext["avzagn.mx", "Tampere`", 77]
Out[3381]= "avzagn.mx"
In[3382]:= ContextInMxFile["avzagn.mx"]
Out[3382]= "Tampere`"
The ReplaceContextInMx1 procedure – an extension of the
ReplaceContextInMx procedure on a case of absence of context
for a mx–file w. The procedure call ReplaceContextInMx1[x, w]
returns the 3-element list of the form {a, x, w}, where a – an old
context, x – a new context and w – updated w file with a new x
context, if its previous version had context or did not have it (in
this case the absence of context is identified as $Failed). In a case if w
file is corrupted, the message "File w is corrupted" is returned.
Since as a result of its execution the procedure clears all symbols
in the current session that have the "Global'" context, then it is
desirable to make calling this procedure at the beginning of the
current session to avoid possible misunderstandings. The next
fragment represents source code of the procedure and examples
of its typical application.
In[3312]:= ReplaceContextInMx1[x_ /; ContextQ[x],
f_ /; FileExistsQ[f] && FileExtension[f] == "mx"] :=
Module[{a = ContextInMxFile[f], b, c, d},
If[ContextQ[a], RenameMxContext[f, x]; {a, x, f},
If[SameQ[a, $Failed], Map[ClearAll[#] &, CNames["Global`"]];
Get[f]; b = CNames["Global`"]; Map[ContextToSymbol3[#, x] &, b];
DumpSave[f, x]; {a, x, f}, a]]]
In[3313]:= ReplaceContextInMx1["Tampere`", "agn47.mx"]
Out[3313]= {"Grodno`", "Tampere`", "agn42.mx"}
In[3314]:= ReplaceContextInMx1["Tallinn`", "rans.mx"]
Out[3314]= "File rans.mx is corrupted"
In[3315]:= ReplaceContextInMx1["Grodno`", "avzagn.mx"]
Out[3315]= {$Failed, "Grodno`", "avzagn.mx"}
Presently, using the above procedure ContextToSymbol2 or
ContextToSymbol3, the procedure that executes replenishment
of mx-file f contained a package by new tools can be presented.
324
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
The procedure call AdjunctionToMx[y, f] returns full path to a
mx–file with a context updated by new y tools. At that, a single
y symbol or their list can be as the first argument whereas their
definitions and usage should be previously evaluated. Besides,
if the mx–file had been already uploaded, it remains, otherwise
it will be unloaded of the current session. The procedure call on
a mx–file f without context returns $Failed.
In[2216]:= AdjunctionToMx[y_ /; SymbolQ[y] || ListQ[y] &&
DeleteDuplicates[Map[SymbolQ[#] &, Flatten[{y}]]] == {True},
f_ /; FileExistsQ[f] && FileExtension[f] == "mx"] :=
Module[{a = ContextInMxFile[f], b},
If[a === $Failed, $Failed, If[! FreeQ[$Packages, a], b = 77, Get[f]];
Map[Quiet[ContextToSymbol2[#, a]] &, Flatten[{y}]];
ToExpression["DumpSave[" <> ToString1[f] <> "," <>
ToString1[a] <> "]"];
If[! SameQ[b, 77], RemovePackage[a], 72]; f]]
In[2217]:= G72[x_, y_] := x^2 + y^2; G72::usage = "Help on G72
function."; V77[x_, y_] := x^3 + y^3;
V77::usage = "Help on V77 function."; Get["avzagn.mx"]
In[2218]:= ContextInMxFile["avzagn.mx"]
Out[2218]= "Tampere`"
In[2219]:= CNames["Tampere`"]
Out[2219]= {"ArtKr", "GSV"}
In[2220]:= AdjunctionToMx[{G72, V77}, "avzagn.mx"]
Out[2220]= "avzagn.mx"
In[2221]:= ClearAll[ArtKr, GSV, G72, V77]
In[2222]:= Get["avzagn.mx"]; CNames["Tampere`"]
Out[2222]= {"ArtKr", "G72", "GSV", "V77"}
In addition to the previous procedure the procedure call
CreationMx[x, y, f] creates a new mx–file f with tools defined by
the y argument (a single symbol or their list) and with a context x,
returning full path to the f file. At that, definitions and usage of
the y symbols should be previously evaluated. Furthermore, if
mx–file f already exists, it remains, but instead of it a new mx–
file is created. The procedure call for a context x that exists in
the $Packages variable returns $Failed [8-10,15,16].
Sometimes, it is expedient to replace a context of means of
the user package uploaded into the current session. This task is
325
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
solved by means of the RemoveContext procedure, whose call
RemoveContext[j, x, y, z, h,…] returns nothing, replacing in the
current session a context j ascribed to the means {x, y, z, h,…} of
the user package by the "Global'" context. In the absence of the
{x, y, z, h,…} means with the j context the procedure call returns
$Failed. In addition, a mx–file contained the means {x, y, z, h,…}
remains without change. The fragment represents source code
of the procedure RemoveContext with an example of its use.
In[18]:= RemoveContext[at_ /; ContextQ[at], x__] :=
Module[{a = {}, b, c = {}, d = Map[ToString, {x}], f = "$$$", Attr},
d = Intersection[CNames[at], d];
b = Flatten[Map[PureDefinition, d]];
If[b == {}, $Failed, Attr := Map[{#, Attributes[#]} &, d];
Do[AppendTo[a, StringReplace[b[[k]], at <>
d[[k]] <> "`" –> ""]], {k, 1, Length[d]}];
Write[f, a]; Close[f];
Do[AppendTo[c, at <> d[[k]]], {k, 1, Length[d]}]; c = Flatten[c];
Map[{ClearAttributes[#, Protected], Remove[#]} &, d];
Map[ToExpression, Get[f]]; DeleteFile[f];
Map[ToExpression["SetAttributes[" <> #[[1]] <> "," <>
ToString[#[[2]]] <> "]"] &, Attr]; ]]
In[19]:= Get["avzagn.mx"]
In[20]:= CNames["Tampere`"]
Out[20]= {"Art", "G72", "G721", "GSV", "V77"}
In[21]:= RemoveContext["Tampere`", Art, G72, G721, GSV, V77]
In[22]:= Map[Context, {Art, G72, G721, GSV, V77}]
Out[22]= {"Global`", "Global`", "Global`", "Global`", "Global`"}
In connection with the context processing means discussed
above, it quite is reasonablly note a procedure for testing of the
correctness of mx-files. Calling CorrectMxQ[f] procedure returns
True if the existing a mx-file is correctly loaded into the current
session by means of the call Get[f], and False otherwise. While
the call CorrectMxQ[f, t] additionally through the 2nd optional t
argument – an indefined variable – returns two-element list of the
format {c, "Yes"} where c – a context of the f file if the f file was
already loaded into the current session, {c, "No"} if f file is not
loaded and the message "File f is corrupted" if f file is corrupted.
326
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
Following fragment represents source code of the CorrectMxQ
procedure with examples of its typical application.
CorrectMxQ[f_ /; FileExistsQ[f] && FileExtension[f] == "mx", t___] :=
Module[{a = ContextInMxFile[f], b, c, d},
{If[ContextQ[a],
If[FreeQ[$ContextPath, a], d = {a, "No"}, d = {a, "Yes"}]; True,
If[! SameQ[a, $Failed], d = "File " <> f <> " is corrupted"; False,
b = CNames["Global`"]; DumpSave["##.mx", b];
Map[ClearAll, b]; Get[f]; c = CNames["Global`"];
If[MemberQ3[b, c], d = {a, "Yes"}; True, d = {a, "No"};
Map[ClearAll, CNames["Global`"]]; Get["##.mx"]; True]]],
Quiet[DeleteFile["##.mx"]],
If[{t} != {} && SymbolQ[t], t = d, Null]}[[1]]]
In[2331]:= CorrectMxQ["c:\\mathematica\\mathtoolbox.mx"]
Out[2331]= True
In[2332]:= CorrectMxQ["c:/mathematica/mathtoolbox.mx", h]
Out[2332]= True
In[2333]:= h
Out[2333]= {"AladjevProcedures`", "Yes"}
In[2334]:= CorrectMxQ["gsv.mx", g]
Out[2334]= False
In[2335]:= g
Out[2335]= "File gsv.mx is corrupted"
In[2336]:= CorrectMxQ["vsv.mx", t]
Out[2336]= True
In[2337]:= t
Out[2337]= {$Failed, "No"}
Interconnection of contexts and packages in Mathematica.
Because of the importance of the relationships of contexts and
packages, the necessity of defining of contexts of symbols arises.
Meanwhile, in the current session, there may be symbols of the
same name with different contexts whereas the built-in function
Context returns only the 1st context located in the $ContextPath
list. Meantime the complete result is provided by the procedure
whose call ContextDef[x] returns the list of contexts assigned to
a symbol x. Following fragment represents source code of the
procedure with examples of its typical application.
327
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
In[1]:= BeginPackage["RansIan`"]
GSV::usage = "help on GSV."
Begin["`GSV`"]
GSV[x_, y_, z_] := Module[{a = 72}, x*y*z*a]
End[]
EndPackage[];
In[7]:= BeginPackage["Tampere`"]
GSV::usage = "help on GSV."
Begin["`GSV`"]
GSV[x_, y_, z_] := Module[{a = 77}, x*y*z*a]
End[]
EndPackage[];
… GSV: Symbol GSV appears in multiple contexts {Tampere`,
RansIan`}; definitions in context Tampere` may shadow or be … .
In[13]:= GSV[x_Integer, z_Integer] := Module[{a = 42}, (x + z)*a]
In[14]:= Context[GSV]
Out[14]= "Tampere`"
In[15]:= $ContextPath
Out[15]= {"Tampere`", "RansIan`", "DocumentationSearch`",
"ResourceLocator`", "URLUtilities`", "AladjevProcedures`",
"PacletManager`", "System`", "Global`"}
In[16]:= ContextDef[x_ /; SymbolQ[x]] :=
Module[{a = $ContextPath, b = ToString[x], c = {}},
Do[If[! SameQ[ToString[Quiet[Check[ToExpression[
"Definition1[" <> ToString1[a[[k]] <> b] <> "]"], "Null"]]],
"Null"], AppendTo[c, {a[[k]] <> b, If[ToString[Definition[b]] !=
"Null", "Global`" <> b, Nothing]}]], {k, 1, Length[a]}];
Map[StringReplace[#, "`" <> ToString[x] –> "`"] &,
DeleteDuplicates[Flatten[c]]]]
In[17]:= ContextDef[GSV]
Out[17]= {"Tampere`", "Global`", "RansIan`"}
In[78]:= DefContext[x_ /; ContextQ[x], y_Symbol] :=
Module[{a = $ContextPath, b, c, d},
If[Set[d, ContextDef[y]] == {}||d == {"Global`"}, Definition[y],
If[FreeQ[d, x] || FreeQ[a, x], $Failed, a = PrependTo[a, x];
b = ToExpression[c = x <> ToString[y]];
If[x == "Global`" && ContextDef[y] != {},
Quiet[Definition2[y][[–2]]], StringReplace[Definition2[b][[1]],
{x –> "", ToString[y] <> "`" –> ""}]], $Failed]]]
328
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
In[79]:= DefContext["RansIan`", GSV]
Out[79]= "GSV[x_, y_, z_] := Module[{a = 72}, x*y*z*a]"
In[80]:= DefContext["Tampere`", GSV]
Out[80]= "GSV[x_, y_, z_] := Module[{a = 77}, x*y*z*a]"
In[81]:= DefContext["Global`", GSV]
Out[81]= "GSV[x_Integer, z_Integer] := Module[{a = 42}, (x+z)*a]"
Because of the multiplicity admissibility of contexts for a
symbol, it is advantageous to have a means for determining the
symbol depending on its context. The task is solved by means of
a procedure whose source code is represented in the previous
fragment and whose call DefContext[c, s] returns the definition
of a symbol s having a context c. If s is an undefined symbol, the
procedure call returns Null; if c is not a context of the s symbol,
then the procedure call returns $Failed; if s is not a symbol, then
the procedure call is returned as unevaluated. Thus, at using of
the objects of the same name, to avoid misunderstandings it is
necessary, generally, to associate them with the contexts which
have been ascribed to them.
For receiving access to the package tools it is necessary that
a package containing them was uploaded to the current session,
and the list defined by means of the $ContextPath variable has
to include the context corresponding to the package. A package
can be loaded in any place of the current document by means of
the call Get["context'"] or by means of the call Needs["context'"]
to define uploading of a package if the context associated with
the package is absent in the list defined by $Packages variable.
In a case if package begins with BeginPackage["Package'"], at
its uploading to the lists defined by the variables $ContextPath
and $Packages only context "Package'" is placed, providing the
access to exports of the package and system means.
If a package uses means of other packages, then the package
should begin with the construction BeginPackage["Package'",
{"Package1'", …, "Package2'"}] with indication of the list of the
contexts associated with such packages. It allows to include, in
addition, in the system lists $ContextPath and $Packages the
demanded contexts. With features of uploading of packages the
329
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
reader can familiarize oneself, in particular, in [6-8,10-15].
When operating with contexts, the question often arises of
testing a string expression as a potentially possible context. The
system does not have such a tool and it is possible use a simple
function whose call ContextQ[j] returns True if j is a potentially
possible context and False otherwise.
In[78]:= ContextQ[j_] := StringQ[j] && StringLength[j] > 1 &&
StringFreeQ[j, "``"] && SymbolQ[StringReplace[j, "`" –> ""]] &&
StringTake[j, –1] == "`" && ! StringTake[j, 1] === "`"
In[79]:= ContextQ["a2a`b1bb`ccc1`"]
Out[79]= True
In[80]:= ContextQ["aa``bbb`ccc`"]
Out[80]= False
A package similarly the procedure allows a nesting; at that,
in Mathematica all subpackages composing it are distinguished
and registered. The means defined in the main package, and in
its subpackages are fully accessible in the current session after
uploading of the nested package as quite visually illustrates a
number of simple examples [8-10]. Meanwhile, for performance
of the aforesaid it is necessary to redefine system $ContextPath
variable after uploading of the nested package, having added all
contexts of subpackages of the main package to the list defined
by the $ContextPath variable. In this context the ToContextPath
procedure automatizes this task, whose call ToContextPath[x]
provides updating of contents of the current list determined by
$ContextPath variable by adding to its end of all contexts of m–
file x containing in a simple or nested package. Fragment below
represents source code of the procedure with an example of use.
In[3333]:= ToContextPath[x_ /; FileExistsQ[x] &&
FileExtension[x] == "m"] := Module[{a = ReadString[x], b},
b = StringReplace[a, "\n" –> ""];
b = StringCases[b, "["~~ Shortest[__] ~~"]"];
b = Map[StringTrim[#, ("[" | "]")] &, b];
b = Select[b, ContextQ[Quiet[ToExpression[#]]] &];
b = ToExpression[DeleteDuplicates[b]];
$ContextPath = Flatten[Insert[$ContextPath, b, –3]];
DeleteDuplicates[$ContextPath]]
330
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
In[3334]:= ToContextPath[Directory[] <> "\\init.m"]
Out[3334]= {"DocumentationSearch`", "ResourceLocator`",
"URLUtilities`", "AladjevProcedures`", "PacletManager`",
"NeuralNetworks`", "NeuralNetworks`Bootstrap`Private`",
"GeneralUtilities`", "MXNetLink`", "System`", "Global`"}
However, because of certain features the use of the nested
packages doesn't make a special sense.
Thus, if the call Context[x] of built-in function returns the
context associated with a symbol x, then an interesting enough
question of detecting of a m–file with a package containing the
given context arises. The call FindFileContext[x] returns the list
of full paths to m–files with packages containing the x context;
in a case of absence of such files the call returns the empty list.
In addition, the call FindFileContext[x, y, z, …] with optional {y,
z, …} arguments – the names in string format of devices of external
memory of direct access – provides search of required files on the
specified devices instead of all file system of the computer in a
case of the procedure call with one actual argument. The search
of the required m-files is done also in the $Recycle.bin directory
of Windows 7 system [12-16]. However, it must be kept in mind,
that search within all file system of the computer can demand a
rather essential temporal expenditure.
We have created a number of tools [8] for processing of the
user packages located in files of type {cdf, nb, m, mx}. At that, of
particular interest is the procedure for determining whether a
file of type mx with user package contains the specified tools.
In[3332]:= ToolsInMxQ[x_, y_ /; FileExistsQ[y] &&
FileExtension[y] == "mx", t___] :=
Module[{a = Map[ToString, Flatten[{x}]],
b = ContextsInFiles[y], c, d},
If[MemberQ[$ContextPath, b], MemberQ6[CNames[b], a, t],
Quiet[Get[y]]; c = MemberQ6[Set[d, CNames[b]], a, t];
Map[ClearAll[#] &, d]; $ContextPath =
ReplaceAll[$ContextPath, b –> Nothing];
Unprotect[$Packages]; $Packages =
Complement[$Packages, Contexts[StringTake[b, {1, –2}] <> "*"]];
SetAttributes[$Packages, Protected]; c]]
331
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
In[3333]:= ToolsInMxQ[{Vz, mm, Gn, nn}, "Agn.mx", t42]
Out[3333]= False
In[3334]:= t42
Out[3334]= {mm, nn}
The procedure call ToolsInMxQ[x, y, t] returns True if a tool
x or their list belong to a file y of mx-type with the user package,
and False otherwise. At that, through the 3rd optional argument
t – an undefined symbol – the list of elements of x that are absent
in the y file are returned. The procedure uses an useful enough
MemberQ6 procedure whose sourse code is represented below.
In[2]:= MemberQ6[x_ /; ListQ[x], y_ /; ListQ[y], t___] :=
Module[{a = {}, b = {}}, Do[If[MemberQ[x, y[[j]]],
AppendTo[a, True], AppendTo[a, False];
AppendTo[b, y[[j]]]], {j, Length[y]}];
a = AllTrue[a, # == True &];
If[{t} != {} && ! HowAct[t], t = b, 77]; a]
In[3]:= {MemberQ6[{a, b, c, d, g, h}, {a, d, h, u, t, s, w, g, p}, t], t}
Out[3]= {False, {u, t, s, w, p}}
The call MemberQ6[x, y, t] returns True if all elements of a
list y belong to a list x, and False otherwise. In addition, through
the third optional argument t – an undefined symbol – the list of
elements of the y list that are not in the x list are returned.
In a sense the procedures ContextMfile and ContextNBfile
are inverse to the procedures FindFileContext, FindFileContext1
and ContextInFile, their successful calls ContextMfile[w] and
ContextNBfile[w] return the context associated with a package
located in a file w of formats ".m" and {".nb", ".cdf"} accordingly;
the w file is set by means of name or full path to it [8,10-16].
Unlike of the procedure DeletePackage [16] the procedure
RemovePackage is that the symbols determined by the package,
removes completely so that their names are no longer recognized
in the current session. The call DeletePackage[x] returns Null, i.
e. nothing, providing removal from the current session of the
package, determined by a context x, including all its exported
symbols and accordingly updating the lists determined by the
$Packages, $ContextPath and Contexts[] variables. Fragment
332
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
below represents source code of the DeletePackage procedure
along with accompanying examples.
In[3331]:= BeginPackage["Package7`"]
W::usage = "Help on W."
Begin["`W`"]
W[x_Integer, y_Integer] := x^2 + y^2
End[]
EndPackage[];
In[3337]:= $Packages
Out[3337]= {"Package7`", "DocumentationSearch`", …, "Global`"}
In[3338]:= $ContextPath
Out[3338]= {"Package7`", "DocumentationSearch`", …, "Global`"}
In[3339]:= MemberQ[Contexts[], "Package7`"]
Out[3339]= True
In[3340]:= CNames["Package7`"]
Out[3340]= {"W"}
In[3341]:= ? W
Out[3341]= "Help on W."
In[3342]:= DeletePackage[x_] := Module[{a},
If[! MemberQ[$Packages, x], $Failed, a = Names[x <> "*"];
Map[ClearAttributes[#, Protected] &,
Flatten[{"$Packages", "Contexts", a}]]; Quiet[Map[Remove, a]];
$Packages = Select[$Packages, # != x &];
$ContextPath = Select[$ContextPath, # != x &];
Contexts[] = Select[Contexts[], StringCount[#, x] == 0 &];
Quiet[Map[Remove, Names[x <> "*"]]];
Map[SetAttributes[#, Protected] &, {"$Packages",
"Contexts"}];]]
In[3343]:= DeletePackage["Package7`"]
In[3344]:= $Packages
Out[3344]= {"DocumentationSearch`", …,"System`", "Global`"}
In[3345]:= $ContextPath
Out[3345]= {"DocumentationSearch`", …, "System`", "Global`"}
In[3346]:= CNames["Package7`"]
Out[3346]= {}
In[3347]:= ?W
Out[3347]= Missing["UnknownSymbol", "W"]
In[3348]:= MemberQ[Contexts[], "Package7`"]
Out[3348]= False
333
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
Context management is discussed in sufficient detail in [4,
6,8-15] along with a number of software means focused on the
operating with contexts and associated with them objects. In
particular, the procedure below is quite interesting whose call
AllContexts[] returns list of contexts that contain in the system
packages of the current Mathematica version, whereas the call
AllContexts[x] returns True, if x is a context of the above type,
and False otherwise. The fragment represents source code of the
procedure along with typical examples of its application.
In[2247]:= AllContexts[y___] := Module[{a = Directory[], c, h,
b = SetDirectory[$InstallationDirectory]},
b = FileNames[{"*.m", "*.tr"}, {"*"}, Infinity];
h[x_] := StringReplace[StringJoin[Map[FromCharacterCode,
BinaryReadList[x]]], {"\n" –> "", "\r" –> "", "\t" –> "", " " –> "",
"{" –> "", "}" –> ""}];
c = Flatten[Select[Map[StringCases[h[#],
{"BeginPackage[\"" ~~ Shortest[W__] ~~ "`\"]",
"Needs[\"" ~~ Shortest[W__] ~~ "`\"]",
"Begin[\"" ~~ Shortest[W__] ~~ "`\"]",
"Get[\"" ~~ Shortest[W__] ~~ "`\"]",
"Package[\"" ~~ Shortest[W__] ~~ "`\"]"}] &, b], # != {} &]];
c = DeleteDuplicates[Select[c, StringFreeQ[#, {"*", "="}] &]];
SetDirectory[a]; c = Flatten[Append[Select[Map[
StringReplace[StringTake[#, {1, –2}], {"Get[" –> "",
"Begin[" –> "", "Needs[" –> "", "BeginPackage[" –> "",
"Package[" –> ""}, 1] &, c], # != "\"`Private`\"" &],
{"\"Global`\"", "\"CloudObjectLoader`\""}]];
c = Map[ToExpression, Sort[Select[DeleteDuplicates[Flatten[
Map[If[StringFreeQ[#, ","], #, StringSplit[#, ","]] &, c]]],
StringFreeQ[#, {"<>", "]", "["}] && StringTake[#, {1, 2}] != "\"`" &]]];
f[{y} != {}, MemberQ[c, y], c]]
In[2248]:= AllContexts[]
Out[2248]= "AnatomyGraphics3D`", …, "ZeroMQLink`"}
In[2249]:= Length[%]
Out[2249]= 1633
In[2250]:= AllContexts["PresenterTools`PresenterTools`"]
Out[2250]= True
334
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
As it was noted in [15], for each exported object of a certain
package for it it is necessary to determine an usage. As a result
of loading of such package into the current session all its exports
will be available whereas the local objects, located in a section,
in particular Private, will be inaccessible in the current session.
For testing of a package loaded to the current session or loaded
package which is located in a m–file regarding existence in it of
global and local objects the procedure DefInPackage can be
used, whose the call DefInPackage[x], where x defines a file or
full path to it, or context associated with the package returns the
nested list, whose the first element defines the package context,
the second element – the list of local variables whereas the third
element – the list of global variables of the x package. If the x
argument doesn't define a package or context, the procedure
call DefInPackage[x] is returned unevaluated. In a case of an
unusable x context the procedure call returns $Failed. Fragment
represents source code of the DefInPackage procedure with the
most typical examples of its application.
In[7]:= DefInPackage[x_ /; MfilePackageQ[x]||ContextQ[x]] :=
Module[{a, b = {"Begin[\"`", "`\"]"}, c = "BeginPackage[\"", d,
p, g, t, k = 1, f, n = x},
Label[Avz];
If[ContextQ[n] && Contexts[n] != {}, f = "#"; Save[f, x];
g = FromCharacterCode[17]; t = n <> "Private`";
a = ReadFullFile[f, g]; DeleteFile[f]; d = CNames[n];
p = SubsString[a, {t, g}];
p = DeleteDuplicates[Map[StringCases[#, t ~~ Shortest[___] ~~ "["
<> t ~~ Shortest[___] ~~ " := "] &, p]];
p = Map[StringTake[#, {StringLength[t] + 1,
Flatten[StringPosition[#, "["]][[1]] – 1}] &, Flatten[p]];
{n, DeleteDuplicates[p], d}, If[FileExistsQ[n], a = ReadFullFile[n];
f = StringTake[SubsString[a, {c, "`\"]"}], {15, –3}][[1]];
If[MemberQ[$Packages, f], n = f; Goto[Avz]];
b = StringSplit[a, "*)(*"];
d = Select[b, ! StringFreeQ[StringReplace[#, " " –> ""], "::usage="] &];
d = Map[StringTake[#, {1, Flatten[StringPosition[#, "::"]][[1]] – 1}] &, d];
p = DeleteDuplicates[Select[b, StringDependAllQ[#,
335
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
{"Begin[\"`", "`\"]"}] &]];
p = MinusList[Map[StringTake[#, {9, –4}] &, p], {"Private"}];
t = Flatten[StringSplit[SubsString[a, {"Begin[\"`Private`\"]",
"End[]"}], "*)(*"]]; If[t == {}, {f, MinusList[d, p], p},
g = Map[StringReplace[#, " " –> ""] &, t[[2 ;; –1]]];
g = Select[g, ! StringFreeQ[#, ":="] &];
g = Map[StringTake[#, {1, Flatten[StringPosition[#, ":"]][[1]] – 1}] &, g];
g = Map[Quiet[Check[StringTake[#, {1, Flatten[StringPosition[#,
"["]][[1]] – 1}], #]] &, g]; {f, g, d}], $Failed]]]
In[8]:= DefInPackage["C:\\Mathematica\\MathToolBox.m"]
Out[8]:= {"AladjevProcedures`", {}, {"AcNb", "ActBFM", …,
"$UserContexts1", "$UserContexts2", "$Version1","$Version2"}}
In[9]:= Length[%[[3]]]
Out[9]= 1327
In a number of cases there is a need of full removal from
the current session of a package loaded to it. Partially the given
problem is solved by the standard functions Clear and Remove,
however they don't clear the lists that are defined by variables
$ContextPath, $Packages along with the call Contexts[] off the
package information. This problem is solved by means of the
DeletePackage procedure whose the call DeletePackage[x] will
return Null, in addition, completely removing from the current
session a package defined by x context, including all exports of
the x package and respectively updating the above system lists.
Fragment below represents source code of the DeletePackage
procedure with the most typical example of its application.
In[2247]:= DeletePackage[x_] := Module[{a},
If[! MemberQ[$Packages, x], $Failed, a = Names[x <> "*"];
Map[ClearAttributes[#, Protected] &,
Flatten[{"$Packages", "Contexts", a}]];
Quiet[Map[Remove, a]]; $Packages = Select[$Packages, # != x &];
$ContextPath = Select[$ContextPath, # != x &];
Contexts[] = Select[Contexts[], StringCount[#, x] == 0 &];
Quiet[Map[Remove, Names[x <> "*"]]];
Map[SetAttributes[#, Protected] &, {"$Packages", "Contexts"}];]]
In[2248]:= DeletePackage["AladjevProcedures`"]
In[2249]:= ?DeletePackage
Out[2249]= Missing["UnknownSymbol", "DeletePackage"]
336
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
Natural addition to the DeletePackage and RemovePackage
procedures is the procedure DelOfPackage providing removal
from the current session of the given tools of a loaded package.
Its call DelOfPackage[x, y] returns the y list of tools names of a
package given by its x context which have been removed from
the current session. Whereas the call DelOfPackage[x, y, z] with
the third optional z argument – a mx–file – returns 2–element
list whose the first element defines mx–file z, while the second
element defines the y list of tools of a package x that have been
removed from the current session and have been saved in mx–
file z. At that, only tools of y which are contained in x package
will be removed. The fragment below represents source code of
the DelOfPackage procedure with typical examples of its use.
In[7]:= DelOfPackage[x_ /; ContextQ[x], y_ /; SymbolQ[y] ||
(ListQ[y] && AllTrue[Map[SymbolQ, y], TrueQ]), z___] :=
Module[{a, b, c}, If[! MemberQ[$Packages, x], $Failed,
If[Set[b, Intersection[Names[x <> "*"],
a = Map[ToString, Flatten[{y}]]]] == {}, $Failed,
If[{z} != {} && StringQ[z] && SuffPref[z, ".mx", 2],
ToExpression["DumpSave[" <> ToString1[z] <> "," <>
ToString[b] <> "]"]; c = {z, b}, c = b];
ClearAttributes[b, Protected]; Map[Remove, b]; c]]]
In[8]:= DelOfPackage["AladjevProcedures`", {Mapp, Map1}, "#.mx"]
Out[8]= {"#.mx", {"Map1", "Mapp"}}
The IsPackageQ procedure [8] is intended for testing of any
mx–file regarding existence of the user package in it along with
upload of such package into the current session. The call of the
IsPackageQ[x] procedure returns $Failed if the mx–file doesn't
contain a package, True if the package that is in the x mx–file is
uploaded to the current session, and False otherwise. Moreover,
the procedure call IsPackageQ[x, y] through the second optional
y argument – an indefinite variable - returns the context associated
with the package uploaded to the current session. In addition,
is supposed that the x file is recognized by the testing standard
function FileExistsQ, otherwise the procedure call is returned
unevaluated. The use examples the reader can found in [8-15].
337
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
5.3. Additional tools of operating with the user packages
Tools of the Mathematica for operating with datafiles can
be subdivided to two groups conditionally: the tools supporting
the work with files which are automatically recognized at addressing
to them, and the tools supporting the work with files as a whole. This
theme is quite extensive and is in more detail considered in [8],
here some additional tools of working with files containing the
user packages will be considered. Since tools of access to files of
formats, even automatically recognized by Mathematica, don't
solve a number of important problems, the user is compelled to
program own means on the basis of standard tools and perhaps
with use of own means. Qua of a rather useful example we will
represent the procedure whose call DefFromPackage[x] returns
3–element list, whose first element is definition in string format
of some symbol x whose context is different from {"System'",
"Global'"}, the second element defines its usage while the third
element defines attributes of the x symbol. In addition, on the
symbols associated with 2 specified contexts, the procedure call
returns only list of their attributes. The fragment represents the
source code of the DefFromPackage procedure with examples
of its typical application.
In[327]:= DefFromPackage[x_ /; SymbolQ[x]] := Module[{b = "",
a = Context[x], c = "", p, d = ToString[x], k = 1, h},
If[MemberQ[{"Global`", "System`"}, a], Return[Attributes[x]],
h = a <> d; ToExpression["Save[" <> ToString1[d] <> "," <>
ToString1[h] <> "]"]];
For[k, k < Infinity, k++, c = Read[d, String];
If[c === " ", Break[], b = b <> c]];
p = StringReplace[RedSymbStr[b, " ", " "], h <> "`" –> ""];
{c, k, b} = {"", 1, ""};
For[k, k < Infinity, k++, c = Read[d, String];
If[c === " " || c === EndOfFile, Break[], b = b <>
If[StringTake[c, {–1, –1}] == "\\", StringTake[c, {1, –2}], c]]];
DeleteFile[Close[d]]; {p, StringReplace[b, " /: " <> d –> ""],
Attributes[x]}]
In[328]:= DefFromPackage[StrStr]
Out[328]= {"StrStr[x_] := If[StringQ[x], StringJoin["\"", x, "\""],
338
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
ToString[x]]", "StrStr::usage = "The call StrStr[x] returns an
expression x in string format if x is different from string;
otherwise, the double string obtained from an
expression x is returned.", {}}
The DefFromPackage procedure serves for obtaining of full
information on x symbol whose definition is located in the user
package uploaded into the current session. Unlike the standard
functions FilePrint and Definition this procedure, first, doesn't
print, but returns specified information completely available
for subsequent processing, and, secondly, this information is
returned in an optimum format. At that, in a number of cases
the output of definition of a symbol that is located in an active
package by the standard means is accompanied with a context
associated with the package which complicates its viewing, and
also its subsequent processing. Result of the DefFromPackage
call also obviates this problem. The algorithm realized by the
procedure is based on analysis of structure of a file received in
result of saving of a "y'x" context, where x – a symbol at the
call DefFromPackage[x] and "y'" – a context, associated with
the uploaded package containing the definition of x symbol. In
more detail the algorithm realized by the DefFromPackage is
visible from its source code.
As the 2nd example extending the algorithm of the previous
procedure in the light of application of functions of access it is
possible to represent an useful FullCalls procedure whose the
call FullCalls[x] returns the list whose 1st element is the context
associated with a package loaded in the current session, while
its other elements – the symbols of this package which are used
by the user procedure or function x, or nested list of sublists of
the above type at using by the x of symbols (names of procedures
or functions) from several packages. Source code of the FullCalls
procedure and an example of its application are represented in
the following fragment.
In[7]:= FullCalls[x_ /; ProcQ[x] || FunctionQ[x]] :=
Module[{a = {}, b, d, c = "::usage = ", k = 1},
Save[b = ToString[x], x];
339
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
For[k, k < Infinity, k++, d = Read[b, String];
If[d === EndOfFile, Break[], If[StringFreeQ[d, c], Continue[],
AppendTo[a, StringSplit[StringTake[d,
{1, Flatten[StringPosition[d, c]][[1]] – 1}], " /: "][[1]]]]]];
a = Select[a, SymbolQ[#] &]; DeleteFile[Close[b]];
a = Map[{#, Context[#]} &, DeleteDuplicates[a]];
a = If[Length[a] == 1, a, Map[DeleteDuplicates, Map[Flatten,
Gather[a, #1[[2]] === #2[[2]] &]]]]; {d, k} = {{}, 1};
While[k <= Length[a], b = Select[a[[k]], ContextQ[#] &];
c = Select[a[[k]], ! ContextQ[#] &];
AppendTo[d, Flatten[{b, Sort[c]}]]; k++];
d = MinusList[If[Length[d] == 1, Flatten[d], d], {ToString[x]}];
If[d == {Context[x]}, {}, d]]
In[8]:= FullCalls[DefFromPackage]
Out[8]= {"AladjevProcedures`", "GenRules", "ListListQ", "Map3",
"Map13", "Map9", "RedSymbStr", "StrDelEnds", "StringMultiple",
"SuffPref", "SymbolQ", "SymbolQ1", "ToString1"}
Thus, the procedure call FullCalls[x] provides possibility of
testing of the user procedure or function, different from built-in
means, regarding using by it of means whose definitions are in
packages loaded into the current session. In development of the
procedure the FullCalls1 procedure can be offered with whose
source code and typical examples of its use the interested reader
can familiarize in [8,16]. In addition, both procedures FullCalls
and FullCalls1 are rather useful at programming a number of
appendices with which can familiarize in [7-12,14,15].
In a number of cases there is a necessity for uploading into
the current session of the system Mathematica not entirely of a
package, but only separate tools contained in it, for example, of
a procedure or function, or their list. In the following fragment
a procedure is represented, whose call ExtrOfMfile[x, y] returns
Null, i.e. nothing, loading in the current session the definitions
only of those tools that are defined by an y argument and are
located in a file x of m–format. In addition, at existence in the
m–file of several tools of the same name, the last is uploaded in
the current session. While the call ExtrOfMfile[x, y, z] with the
third optional z argument – an indefinite variable – in addition,
340
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
through z returns the list of definitions of y tools which will be
located in the m–file x. In a case of absence in the m–file x of y
tools the procedure call returns $Failed. The following fragment
represents source code of the ExtrOfMfile procedure along with
typical examples of its application.
In[6]:= ExtrOfMfile[f_/; FileExistsQ[f] && FileExtension[f] == "m",
s_ /; StringQ[s]||ListQ[s], z___] := Module[{Vsv, p = {}, v, m},
m = ReadFullFile[f];
If[StringFreeQ[m, Map["(*Begin[\"`" <> # <> "`\"]*)" &,
Map[ToString, s]]], $Failed,
Vsv[x_, y_] := Module[{a = m, b = FromCharacterCode[17],
c = FromCharacterCode[24], d = "(*Begin[\"`" <> y <> "`\"]*)",
h = "(*End[]*)", g = {}, t}, a = StringReplace[a, h –> c];
If[StringFreeQ[a, d], $Failed,
While[! StringFreeQ[a, d], a = StringReplace[a, d –> b, 1];
t = StringTake[SubStrSymbolParity1[a, b, c][[1]], {4, –4}];
t = StringReplace[t, {"(*" –> "", "*)" –> ""}];
AppendTo[g, t]; a = StringReplace[a, b –> "", 1]; Continue[]];
{g, ToExpression[g[[–1]]]}]];
If[StringQ[s], v = Quiet[Check[Vsv[f, s][[1]], $Failed]],
Map[{v = Quiet[Check[Vsv[f, #][[1]], $Failed]], AppendTo[p, v]} &,
Map[ToString, s]]];
If[{z} != {} && ! HowAct[z], z = If[StringQ[s], v, p]]; ]]
In[7]:= Clear[StrStr]
In[8]:= Definition[StrStr]
Out[8]= Null
In[9]:= ExtrOfMfile["c:/mathematica/MathToolBox.m", "StrStr"]
In[10]:= Definition[StrStr]
Out[10]= StrStr[x_] := If[StringQ[x], " <> x <> ", ToString[x]]
It should be noted that this procedure can be quite useful in
a case of need of recovery in the current session of the damaged
means without uploading of the user packages containing their
definitions. In a certain measure, to the previous procedure the
ExtrDefFromM procedure adjoins whose call ExtrDefFromM[x,
y] in tabular form returns an usage and definition of a means y
contained in a m–file x with the user package. This tool doesn't
demand loading of the m–file x in the current session, allowing
in it selectively to activate the means of the user package.
341
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
At last, the procedure ContextsInFiles provides evaluation
of the context ascribed to a file of the format {"m", "mx", "cdf",
"nb"}. The procedure call ContextsInFiles[w] returns the single
context ascribed to a file w of the above formats. At absence of
a context the call returns $Failed. In addition, it must be kept in
mind that the context in files of the specified format is sought
relative to the key word "BeginPackage" that is typically used at
beginning of a package. A return of list of format {"Context1",
…, "Contextp"} is equivalent to existence in a m–file of a certain
construction of format BeginPackage["context1'", {"context2'",
..., "contextp'"}] where {"context2'", ..., "contextp'"} determines
uploadings of the appropriate files if their contexts aren't in the
$Packages variable. The next fragment represents source code
of the procedure with the most typical examples of its use.
In[47]:= ContextsInFiles[x_ /; FileExistsQ[x] &&
MemberQ[{"m", "mx", "cdf", "nb"}, FileExtension[x]]] :=
Module[{a = StringReplace[ReadFullFile[x], {" " –> "",
"\n" –> "", "\t" –> ""}], b, b1,
d = Flatten[{Range[65, 90], Range[96, 122]}]},
If[FileExtension[x] == "m", b = StringCases[a,
Shortest["BeginPackage[\"" ~~ __ ~~ "`\"]"]];
If[b === {}, b = $Failed, b = Map[StringTake[#, {15, –3}] &, b][[1]];
b1 = StringCases[a, Shortest["BeginPackage[\"" ~~ __ ~~ "`\"}]"]];
If[b1 === {}, b1 = $Failed, If[! StringFreeQ[b1[[1]], {"{", "}"}],
b1 = StringReplace[b1[[1]], {"{" –> "", "}" –> "", "\"" –> ""}];
b1 = StringSplit[StringTake[b1, {14, –2}], ","], b1 = $Failed]]];
b = DeleteDuplicates[Flatten[{b, b1}]];
SetAttributes[ContextQ, Listable];
b = Select[b, AllTrue[Flatten[ContextQ[{#}]], TrueQ] &];
If[ListQ[b] && Length[DeleteDuplicates[b]] == 1, b[[1]], b],
If[FileExtension[x] == "mx", Quiet[Check[b = StringCases[a,
Shortest["CONT" ~~ __ ~~ "ENDCONT"]][[1]];
b = Flatten[Map[ToCharacterCode, Characters[StringReplace[b,
{"CONT" –> "", "ENDCONT" –> ""}]]]];
StringJoin[Map[FromCharacterCode[#] &,
Select[b, MemberQ[d, #] &]]], $Failed]],
Quiet[Check[a = StringCases[a, Shortest["BeginPackage\",
342
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
\"[\",\"\\\"\\<" ~~ __ ~~ "`\\>\\\"\",\"]\"}]"]][[1]];
a = StringReplace[a, "BeginPackage" –> ""];
b = Flatten[Map[ToCharacterCode, Characters[a]]];
StringJoin[Map[FromCharacterCode[#] &,
Select[b, MemberQ[d, #] &]]], $Failed]]]]]
In[48]:= ContextsInFiles["C:\\mathematica\\mathtoolbox.mx"]
Out[48]= "AladjevProcedures`"
In[49]:= ContextsInFiles[$InstallationDirectory <>\\SystemFiles\\
components\\ccodegenerator\\CCodeGenerator.m"]
Out[49]= {"CCodeGenerator`", "CompiledFunctionTools`",
"CompiledFunctionTools`Opcodes`", "SymbolicC`",
"CCompilerDriver`"}
In addition to the previous ContextsInFiles procedure the
ContextsFromFiles procedure allows to extract contexts from
files of any format that are located in the set directories or are
given by own full or short names. The call ContextsFromFiles[]
without arguments returns the sorted list of contexts from all
files located in the catalog $InstallationDirectory and in all its
subdirectories whereas the call ContextsFromFiles[x] returns
the sorted list of contexts from all files located in a directory x
and in all its subdirectories, at last the call ContextsFromFiles[x]
on an existing x file returns the sorted list of contexts from the x
file. The unsuccessful means call returns $Failed or is returned
unevaluated. The next fragment represents source code of the
procedure with the most typical examples of its application.
In[2226]:= ContextsFromFiles[x___String] :=
Module[{a = If[{x} == {}, FileNames["*", $InstallationDirectory,
Infinity], If[DirQ[x], FileNames["*", x, Infinity],
If[FileExistsQ[x], {x}, $Failed]]], b}, If[a === $Failed, $Failed,
b = Select[Map[Quiet[StringReplace[#, {": " -> "", " " -> "", "\"" -> ""}]] &,
Flatten[Map[StringCases[Quiet[Check[ReadFullFile[#], ""]],
(Shortest[": " ~~ __ ~~ "` "] | Shortest["\"" ~~ __ ~~ "`\""]) ..] &, a]]],
ContextQ[#] &]; Sort[DeleteDuplicates[b]]]]
In[2227]:= ContextsFromFiles[$InstallationDirectory <>
"\\AddOns\\Applications\\AuthorTools\\Kernel"]
Out[2227]= {"AuthorTools`", "AuthorTools`MakeBilateralCells`"}
Note, the above procedure operates on platforms Windows
XP Professional and Windows 7 Professional. The performance of
the procedure is higher if it is applied to a mx–file.
343
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
The binary mx–files are optimized for fast loading. Wherein,
they cannot be exchanged between different operating systems
or versions of the Mathematica. Any mx–file contains version
of Mathematica, the type of operating system in which it has
been created and the context if it will exist. The procedure call
ContextMathOsMx[x] returns the three–element list whose the
first element determines the context if it exists (otherwise, $Failed
is returned), the second element defines the list whose elements
define version, releases of the Mathematica and the 3rd element
defines operating system in which a mx–file x has been created.
In view of distinctions of the mx–files created on different
platforms there is a natural expediency of creation of the tools
testing a mx–file regarding the platform in which it was created
in virtue of the DumpSave function. The TypeWinMx procedure
is one of such tools. The procedure call TypeWinMx[x] in string
format returns type of operating platform on which a mx–file x
was created; correct result is returned for a case of the Windows
platform, whereas on other platforms $Failed is returned. This
is conditioned at absence of a possibility to carry out debugging
on other platforms. The next fragment represents source code
of the TypeWinMx procedure with examples of its application.
In[3339]:= TypeWinMx[x_ /; FileExistsQ[x] &&
FileExtension[x] == "mx"] := Module[{a, b, c, d},
If[StringFreeQ[$OperatingSystem, "Windows"], $Failed,
a = StringJoin[Select[Characters[ReadString[x]],
SymbolQ[#]||Quiet[IntegerQ[ToExpression[#]]]||# == "–" &]];
d = Map[FromCharacterCode, Range[2, 27]];
b = StringPosition[a, {"CONT", "ENDCONT"}];
If[b[[1]][[2]] == b[[2]][[2]],
c = StringCases1[a, {"Windows", "ENDCONT"}, "___"],
b = StringPosition[a, {"Windows", "CONT"}];
c = StringTake[a, {b[[1]][[1]], b[[2]][[2]]}]];
c = StringReplace[c, Flatten[{GenRules[d, ""],
"ENDCONT" –> "", "CONT" –> ""}]]; If[ListQ[c], c[[1]], c]]]
In[3340]:= TypeWinMx["c:\\mathematica\\mathToolBox.mx"]
Out[3340]= "Windows–x86–64"
344
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
A quite certain interest is the question of occurrence in the
definition of the user tools of the tools calls other than built-in
tools. The FullContent procedure solves this problem. Calling
FullContent[x] procedure returns the sorted list containing all names
in string format of the user tools whose calls are in definition of a tool
x. Whereas the call FullContent[x, y] with the 2nd optional y argument
– an indefinite symbol – additionally through it returns the nested list
of the above tools with contexts ascribed to them; the list is gathered
according to the contexts. In addition, a context is the first in the list
of the tools names with this context. Indeed, the name x is included
in the returned list too. The following fragment represents the source
code of the FullContent procedure with examples of its application.
In[42]:= FullContent[x_, y___] := Module[{a, b, c, n, m},
If[MemberQ[{FullContent, "FullContent"}, x],
c = FullContent[ProcQ], a = Save["###", x];
a = StringReplace[ReadString["###"], {"\n" –> "", "\r" –> ""}];
b = StringCases[a, Shortest[" /: " ~~ __ ~~ "::usage ="]];
DeleteFile["#"]; c = Map[{n = StringReplace[#, "::usage =" –> ""];
m = Flatten[StringPosition[n, " /: "]];
StringTake[n, {m[[–1]] + 1, –1}]} &, b];
c = Sort[DeleteDuplicates[Map[StringTrim[#, "\\"] &, Flatten[c]]]]];
If[{y} != {} && ! HowAct[y], y = Map[{#, Context[#]} &, c];
y = Gather[y, #1[[2]] == #2[[2]] &];
y = Sort[Map[Sort[DeleteDuplicates[Flatten[#]]] &, y],
If[ContextQ[#1], #1, #2] &]; c, c]]
In[43]:= FullContent[ProcQ, gs]
Out[43]= {"Attributes1", "BlockFuncModQ", "ClearAllAttributes",
"Contexts1", "Definition2", "HeadPF", "HowAct", "ListStrToStr",
"Map3", "Mapp", "MinusList", "ProcQ", "ReduceLists", "ProtectedQ",
"PureDefinition", "StrDelEnds", "SuffPref", "SymbolQ", "SysFuncQ",
"SystemQ", "ToString1", "UnevaluatedQ"}
In[44]:= gs
Out[44]= {{"AladjevProcedures`", "Attributes1", …, "Map3", …,
"SymbolQ", "SysFuncQ", "SystemQ", "ToString1", "UnevaluatedQ"}}
In[45]:= {FullContent[LoadMxQ, vg], vg}
Out[45]= {{"LoadMxQ", "MxOnOpSys", "StrDelEnds", "StringCases2",
"SuffPref", "ToString1"}, {{"AladjevProcedures`", "LoadMxQ",
"MxOnOpSys", "StrDelEnds", "StringCases2", "SuffPref", "ToString1"}}
345
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
The mx–format is serialized package format. As a rule it is
used for the distribution of both system and user packages. The
binary file format is the optimized for fast loading. Meantime,
as noted above, the mx–format files can`t be exchanged between
operating platforms which differ from the predefined variable
$SystemWordLength which gives the number of bits in machine
words on the computer system where Mathematica is running.
Furthermore, the mx–format files created by newer versions of
Mathematica may not be usable by older versions. This raises
the issue of testing the ability to load an arbitrary file of the mxformat into the current session. The following procedure solves
this problem. The fragment below represents the source code of
the LoadMxQ procedure with examples of its application.
In[7]:= LoadMxQ[x_ /; FileExistsQ[x] && FileExtension[x] == "mx"] :=
Module[{a, b, c, MxOnOpSys},
MxOnOpSys[y_/; FileExistsQ[y] && FileExtension[y] == "mx"] :=
Module[{a = ReadString[y], b = "Get.*)", c = "CONT", d},
d = StringCases2[a, {b, c}][[1]];
d = StringReplace[d, {b –> "", c –> "", "\n" –> "", "END" –> ""}];
d = StringJoin[Map[If[MemberQ[Range[32, 127],
ToCharacterCode[#][[1]]], #, Nothing] &, Characters[d]]]];
g[t_] := t; DumpSave["###.mx", g];
If[MxOnOpSys[x] == MxOnOpSys["###.mx"],
DeleteFile["###.mx"]; True, DeleteFile["###.mx"]; False]]
In[8]:= LoadMxQ["C:\\Mathematica\\MathToolBox.mx"]
Out[8]= True
In[9]:= LoadMxQ["dump.mx"]
Out[9]= True
Calling procedure LoadMxQ[x] returns True if a mx–type
file x was created on the current operating platform and can be
loaded into the current Mathematica session by the Get[x] call,
and False otherwise. In our works [8-16] a number of means for
various processing of mx–files with interesting examples using
in programming of various applications is presented. However,
these tools have been debugged on Windows XP and Windows 7
platforms, in other cases requiring sometimes re–debugging.
346
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
References
1. Aladjev V.Z., Vaganov V.A. Modular programming:
Mathematica vs Maple, and vice versa.– USA: Palo Alto, Fultus
Corporation, 2011, ISBN 9781596822689, 418 p.
2. Aladjev V.Z. et al. Programming: System Maple or
Mathematica?– Ukraine: Kherson, Oldi–Plus Press, 2011, ISBN
9789662393460, 474 p.
3. Aladjev V.Z., Boiko V.K., Rovba E.A. Programming in
systems Mathematica and Maple: A Comparative Aspect.–
Grodno, Grodno State University, 2011, 517 p.
4. Aladjev V.Z., Grinn D.S., Vaganov V.A. The extended
functional tools for system Mathematica.– Kherson: Oldi–Plus
Press, 2012, ISBN 9789662393590, 404 p.
5. Aladjev V.Z., Grinn D.S. Extension of functional
environment of system Mathematica.– Kherson: Oldi–Plus
Press, 2012, ISBN 9789662393729, 552 p.
6. Aladjev V.Z., Grinn D.S., Vaganov V.A. The selected
system problems in software environment of system
Mathematica.– Ukraine: Kherson: Oldi–Plus Press, 2013, 556 p.
7. Aladjev V.Z., Vaganov V.A. Extension of Mathematica
system functionality.– USA: CreateSpace, An Amazon.com
Company, 2015, ISBN 9781514237823, 590 p.
8. Aladjev V.Z., Vaganov V. Toolbox for the Mathematica
programmers.– USA, CreateSpace, An Amazon.com Company,
2016, ISBN 1532748833, 630 p.
9. Aladjev V.Z., Boiko V.K., Shishakov M.L. The Art of
programming in Mathematica System.– Estonia: Tallinn, TRG
Press, 2016, ISBN 9789985950890, 735 p.
10. Aladjev V.Z., Boiko V.K., Shishakov M.L. The Art of
programming in Mathematica system. 2nd edition.– USA, Lulu
Press, 2016, ISBN 9781365560736, 735 p.
11. Aladjev V.Z., Shishakov M.L. Software etudes in the
Mathematica.– CreateSpace, An Amazon.com Company, 2017,
614 p., ISBN 1979037272
12. Aladjev V.Z., Shishakov M.L. Software etudes in the
347
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
Mathematica.– Amazon Digital Services, ASIN: B0775YSH72,
2017, www.amazon.com/dp/B0775YSH72
13. Aladjev V.Z., Shishakov M.L., Vaganov V.A. Practical
programming in Mathematica. Fifth edition.– USA: Lulu Press,
2017, 613 p.
14. Aladjev V.Z., Boiko V.K., Grinn D.S., Haritonov V.A.,
Hunt Ü., Rouba Y.A., Shishakov M.L., Vaganov V.A. Books
miscellany on Cellular Automata, General Statistics Theory,
Maple and Mathematica.– Estonia: Tallinn, TRG Press, CD–
edition, 2016.
15. Aladjev V.Z., Boiko V.K., Gostev A., Hunt Ü., Rouba E.,
Shishakov M.L., Grinn D.S., Vaganov V.A. Selected Books and
software published by members of Baltic branch of the Intern.
Academy of Noosphere.– Tallinn: TRG press, 2019, CD–edition,
ISBN 978–9949–9876–3–4
16. Aladjev V.Z. Package of Procedures and Functions for
Mathematica.– TRG: Tallinn, 2018; this package can be freely
downloaded from sites https://yadi.sk/d/oC5lXLWa3PVEhi,
https://yadi.sk/d/2GyQU2pQ3ZETZT.
17. Aladjev V.Z. Modular programming: Mathematica or
Maple – A subjective standpoint / Int. school «Mathematical and
computer modeling of fundamental objects and phenomena in systems
of computer mathematics».– Kazan: Kazan Univ. Press, 2014.
18. V.Z. Aladjev, V.K. Boiko. Tools for computer research
of cellular automata dynamics / Intern. school «Mathematical
modelling of fundamental objects and phenomena in the systems of
computer mathematics»; Int. scientific and practical conference
«Information Technologies in Science and Education» (ITON–2017),
November 4 – 6, 2017, Kazan, pp. 7 – 16.
19. https://bbian.webs.com/Our_publications_2019.pdf
20. Aladjev V.Z., Shishakov M.L. Introduction into
mathematical package Mathematica 2.2.– Moscow: Filin Press,
1997, 363 p., ISBN 5895680046 (in Russian with English summary)
21. Aladjev V.Z., Vaganov V.A., Hunt Ü.J., Shishakov M.L.
Introduction into environment of mathematical package Maple
V.– Minsk: International Academy of Noosphere, the Baltic
Branch, 1998, 452 p., ISBN 1406425698 (in Russian)
348
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
22. Aladjev V.Z., Vaganov V.A., Hunt Ü., Shishakov M.L.
Programming in environment of mathematical package Maple
V.– Minsk–Moscow: Russian Ecology Academy, 1999, 470 p.,
ISBN 4101212982 (in Russian with English summary)
23. Aladjev V.Z., Bogdevicius M.A. Solution of physical,
technical and mathematical problems with Maple V.– Tallinn–
Vilnius, TRG, 1999, 686 p., ISBN 9986053986 (in Russian)
24. Aladjev V.Z., Vaganov V.A., Hunt Ü.J., Shishakov M.L.
Workstation for Mathematicians.– Minsk–Moscow: Russian
Academy of Natural Sciences, 1999, 608 p., ISBN 3420614023
25. Aladjev V.Z., Shishakov M.L. Workstation of
Mathematician.– Moscow: Laboratory of Basic Knowledge,
2000, 752 p. + CD, ISBN 5932080523 (in Russian)
26. Aladjev V.Z., Bogdevicius M.A. Maple 6: Solution of
Mathematical, Statistical, Engineering and Physical Problems.–
Moscow: Laboratory of Basic Knowledge, 2001, 850 p. + CD,
ISBN 593308085X (in Russian with English summary)
27. Aladjev V.Z., Bogdevicius M.A. Special questions of
work in environment of the mathematical package Maple.–
Vilnius: International Academy of Noosphere, the Baltic Branch
& Vilnius Gediminas Technical University, 2001, 208 p. + CD
with Library, ISBN 9985927729 (in Russian with English summary)
28. Aladjev V.Z., Bogdevicius M.A. Interactive Maple:
Solution of mathematical, statistical, engineering and physical
problems.– Tallin: International Academy of Noosphere, the
Baltic Branch, 2001–2002, CD with Booklet, ISBN 9985927710
29. Aladjev V.Z., Vaganov V.A., Grishin E.P. Additional
software of mathematical package Maple of releases 6 and 7.–
Tallinn: Intern. Academy of Noosphere, the Baltic Branch, 2002,
314 p. + CD with Library, ISBN 9985927737 (in Russian)
30. Aladjev V.Z. Effective work in mathematical package
Maple.– Moscow: BINOM Press, 2002, 334 p. + CD, ISBN
593208118Х (in Russian with English summary)
31. Aladjev V.Z., Liopo V.A., Nikitin A.V. Mathematical
package Maple in physical modeling.– Grodno: Grodno State
University, 2002, 416 p., ISBN 3093318313 (in Russian)
349
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
32. Aladjev V.Z., Vaganov V.A. Computer Algebra System
Maple: A New Software Library.– Tallinn: Intern. Academy of
Noosphere, the Baltic Branch, 2002, CD, ISBN 9985927753
33. Aladjev V.Z., Bogdevicius M.A., Prentkovskis O.V. A
New Software for mathematical package Maple of releases 6, 7
and 8.– Vilnius: Vilnius Technical University and International
Academy of Noosphere, the Baltic Branch, 2002, 404 p.
34. Aladjev V.Z., Vaganov V.A. Systems of computer
algebra: A New Software Toolbox for Maple.– Tallinn: Intern.
Academy of Noosphere, the Baltic Branch, 2003, 270 p. + CD,
ISBN 9985927761
35. Aladjev V.Z., Bogdevicius M.A., Vaganov V.A. Systems
of Computer Algebra: A New Software Toolbox for Maple. 2nd
edition.– Tallinn: Intern. Academy of Noosphere, 2004, 462 p.
36. Aladjev V.Z. Computer algebra systems: A new software
toolbox for Maple.– USA: Palo Alto: Fultus Corporation, 2004,
575 p., ISBN 1596820004
37. Aladjev V.Z. Computer algebra systems: A new software
toolbox for Maple.– USA: Palo Alto: Fultus Corporation, 2004,
Adobe Acrobat eBook, ISBN 1596820152
38. Aladjev V.Z., Bogdevicius M.A. Maple: Programming,
physical and engineering problems.– USA: Palo Alto: Fultus
Corporation, 2006, 404 p., ISBN 1596820802, Adobe Acrobat
eBook (pdf), ISBN 1596820810
39. Aladjev V.Z. Computer Algebra Systems. Maple: Art of
Programming.– Moscow: BINOM Press, 2006, 792 p., ISBN
5932081899 (in Russian with English summary)
40. Aladjev V.Z. Foundations of programming in Maple:
Textbook.– Tallinn: International Academy of Noosphere, 2006,
300 p., (pdf), ISBN 998595081X, 9789985950814 (in Russian)
41. Aladjev V.Z., Boiko V.K., Rovba E.A. Programming and
applications elaboration in Maple: Monograph.– Grodno: GRSU,
Tallinn: International Academy of Noosphere, 2007, 456 p.,
ISBN 9789854178912, ISBN 9789985950821 (in Russian)
42. Aladjev V.Z. A Library for Maple system: The Library can
be freely downloaded from https://yadi.sk/d/hw1rnmsbyfVKz
350
Functional and modular programming in Mathematica
About the authors
Aladjev V.Z.
Professor dr. Aladjev V.Z. was born on June 14, 1942 in the
town Grodno (West Belarus). He is the First vice–president of the
International Academy of Noosphere (IAN, 1998) and academician–
secretary of Baltic branch of the IAN whose scientific results have
received international recognition, first, in the field of cellular
automata (homogeneous structures) theory. Dr. Aladjev V.Z. is
known for the works on cellular automata theory and computer
mathematical systems. Dr. Aladjev V.Z. is full member of the
Russian Academy of Cosmonautics (1994), the Russian Academy of
Natural Sciences (1995), International Academy of Noosphere (1998),
and honorary member of the Russian Ecological Academy (1998).
He is the author of more than 500 scientifical publications,
including 90 books and monographs in fields such as: general
statistics, mathematics, informatics, Maple and Mathematica that
have been published in many countries. Aladjev V.Z. established
Estonian School of mathematical theory of homogeneous structures
(cellular automata theory), whose fundamental results received
international recognition and formed the basis of a new section
of modern mathematical cybernetics.
Many applied works of dr. Aladiev V.Z. relate to computer
science, among which are widely known books on computer
mathematics systems. Along with these original editions, he has
developed a rather large library UserLib of new software tools
(over 850 tools), awarded with the web–based Smart Award, and
the unified package MathToolBox (over 1320 tools) for Maple and
Mathematica, respectively, to enhance the functionality of these
computer mathematics systems.
Aladjev V.Z. repeatedly participates as a guest lecturer in
the different international scientific forums in mathematics and
cybernetics or a member of the organizing committee of them.
In 2015 dr. Aladjev V.Z. was awarded by Gold medal "European
Quality" of the European scientific and industrial consortium
for works of scientifical and applied character.
351
V. Aladjev, M. Shishakov, V. Vaganov
Shishakov M.L.
Dr. Shishakov M.L. was born on October 21, 1957 in Gomel
area (Belarus). For his scientific activity Dr. Shishakov M.L. has
more than 66 publications on information technology in various
application fields, including more 26 books and monographs.
Fields of his main interests are cybernetics, theory of statistics,
problems of CAD and designing of mobile software, artificial
intelligence, computer telecommunication, along with applied
software for solution of different tasks of manufacturing and
technical nature. In 1998 dr. M.L. Shishakov was elected as a
full member of the IAN on section of the information sciences
and information technologies.
At present, M.L. Shishakov is the director of the Belarusian–
Swiss company "TDF Ecotech". TDF Ecotech company builds and
operates the appropriate facilities for production of renewable
energy through its subsidiary branches (with a focus on the Belarus
region). Above all, the company works in the field of so–called
"green" energy, combining the essential manufacturing activity
with active scientifical researches.
Vaganov V.A.
Dr. Vaganov V.A. was born on February 2, 1946 in Primorye
Territory (Russia). Now dr. Vaganov V.A. is the proprietor of the
firms Fortex and Sinfex engaging of problems of delivery of the
industrial materials to different firms of the Estonian republic.
Simultaneously, dr. V.A. Vaganov is executive director of the
Baltic branch of the IAN. In addition, dr. Vaganov V.A. is wellknown for the investigations on automation of economic and
statistical works. V.A. Vaganov is the honorary member of the
IANSD and the author of more than 62 applied and scientifical
publications, at the same time including 10 books. The sphere
of his scientific interests includes statistics, economics, problems
the institution of the family, politology, cosmonautics, theory of
sustainable development and other natural-scientific directions.
352